Change is the only condition, which is constant. The conditions around us are changing and they are giving rise to new aspirations and new challenges. The environment and the economic, social and political environment around the world is not the same as it used to be in the eighties and nineties. Technology and the natural environment have also shown the way on the issue of development. The year 2015 was very important for us, in which three major agreements were reached – the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change- (COP 21) and the Sendai Framework 2015-30 on Disaster Risk Reduction.
The international community has expressed its commitment to achieve the objectives and goals set out in these three agreements. There are many common grounds in these three agreements, where all three are related to each other. Studies on disaster damage show that disaster damage needs to be prioritized if we are to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, and to reduce disaster risks, we need to address extreme events and climate change issues. Will happen. Development, disaster risk and climate change are all interrelated and therefore their solutions also need to be integrated.
Disaster risk reduction affects various aspects and sectors of development. Of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, 25 are related to disaster risk reduction under 10, which firmly establish disaster risk reduction as a core development strategy. To fulfill the objective of eradicating extreme poverty, it is necessary to build disaster resistance capacity. As one of the major drivers of disaster risk, just as it creates and increases economic and social vulnerability, poverty significantly increases the risk factors, which in turn limit the progress of sustainable development. Evidence indicates that the effects of disasters undermine hard-earned development in both developing and developed countries, possibly pushing the poorest and most vulnerable sections into greater poverty.
By 2030, 325 million people, especially in Sub-Saharan, Africa and South Asia, will be trapped in poverty and exposed to a full range of natural disasters and extreme climatic conditions. These data suggest that we urgently need to build and strengthen the resilience of poor communities to protect themselves from future disasters that push more people into poverty, as well as their livelihoods and livelihoods. There is also a need to protect the assets so that they can recover from these calamities.
Nepal Gorkha earthquake
The study of damage and loss after this earthquake clearly mentions that this disaster will lead to poverty of additional 2.5 to 3.5 percent Nepalese people in 2015-2016. This percentage works out to at least 7 million in numbers and the disaster is estimated to have caused approximately US$7 billion in damage. The study also shows that the relatively poor population living in the six lowest Human Development Index districts, Dolakha, Sindhupal Chowk, Gorkha, Nuwakot, Rasuwa and Dhading, have suffered a loss of 1,30,000 Nepalese rupees per person. This proves that the poorest and most vulnerable people usually suffer the worst effects of disasters.
The impact of disasters on our societies has become the biggest obstacle in our dream of achieving sustainable socio-economic development. Billions of dollars in economic damage and loss are tarnishing our goals of a prosperous region. With every disaster there is a significant impact on various areas of development such as agriculture, housing, health, education and infrastructure.
Ironically, the increased impact of disasters and increased vulnerability of people to disasters are largely due to unsustainable development activities such as land use and environmental degradation. Given the increasing frequency and scale of disasters in our regions, our countries need coordinated solutions to protect communities, critical infrastructure and development.
It is essential that the development planning process identifies and analyzes the root causes of current and future social and economic risks and factors in risk mitigation measures. If national goals for growth and development, including employment and trade, are to be achieved, the transition from crisis management to risk management must be reflected in public policy frameworks and planning-decision processes to enable risk assessment-based investments. and enable business.
The definition of disaster adopted by the United Nations, which is also included in the National Disaster Management Act, 2005, is as follows – “A disaster is a serious disruption in the functioning of a community or society, causing large-scale human, economic and environmental damage. which is beyond the capacity of that community or society to combat it using its own resources. Crisis can be avoided by careful planning, promptness and use of mitigation measures.
Different stakeholders have understood ‘disaster management’ differently. For those who respond, it is only a response management. For those who are involved in relief work and restoration of order, it is a humanitarian crisis and relief management. These both are post-disaster activities. Pre-disaster planning for risk reduction, risk relief and preparedness are the new rules in this field, and for those who believe in it, it is both pre-disaster risk reduction and post-disaster response.
Post-disaster response was considered one of the most important activities of disaster management in most parts of the world, especially in South Asia and also in India. Therefore, the institutional system, rules, policies, programs were made keeping only these in mind. The entire governance for disaster management was developed keeping in mind the disaster scenario. But fortunately this story is out of date. Since last one and half decade, disaster management in India has changed a lot and it is getting redefined with new experiences at regular intervals.
Following the adoption of the Sendai Framework in 2015, India hosted the first ministerial conference in November 2016 to prepare an Asian roadmap for disaster risk reduction, primarily pre-disaster activities, for Asian and Pacific countries. Hon’ble Prime Minister of India inaugurated the conference and guided by giving 10 principles for disaster risk reduction and development of resilience. Prior to this, more than 185 countries of the world signed documents on disaster risk reduction at the Sendai (a small city of Japan) global conference held in March 2015 to prepare a global roadmap for risk reduction, which is called the Sendai Framework for Action. Called 2015-2030. India is also one of its signatories.
Disaster response is direct, involves high accountability, and therefore everyone is willing to respond. On the other hand, disaster preparedness and risk mitigation are indirect but of high consequence, but go unnoticed. There has been nothing more than conferences and announcements on this issue around the world. The international community has seen many evidences of the success of prevention. India is also witness to such examples. In the severe cyclone that hit Odisha in 1999, more than 13000 lives were lost, as well as heavy damage to property, whereas in 2013, when the cyclone Philin hit our coast, which was a recurrence of the 1999 cyclone and its strength was also almost the same , its effect was the exact opposite of 1999. We lost only 22 lives, of course there was massive property damage. This incident proved to be a great example in the world of how India was successful in reducing the number of deaths to a great extent.
Recently, the death toll in Cyclone Varda which hit Tamil Nadu remained only 14, although there was immense damage to property, as was the case during cyclone Hudhud. It is, therefore, evident that our sincere efforts in making predictable investments in capacity building have yielded positive results in the direction of reducing the death toll. Now the matter of concern is how to deal with the damage caused to property – roads, bridges, housing, hospitals, electricity, productive capital etc.
Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction
Mainstreaming disaster mitigation in the development process at the global, regional and local levels has been an important agenda, but it is a complex task with many challenges. We must learn from our past if we are to build a resilient future.
There is still a need for knowledge sharing among communities and a common platform for creating diverse interactions between the policy makers in the government and the existing disaster managers at all administrative levels.
This means that at the national and local level, plans should be such that they incorporate disaster-resistance building bye-laws, land-use regionalisation, resource planning, setting up of early warning systems and creating awareness of technological capability. For this it is also necessary that the help of scientific and technological innovations, early warning system should be taken and disseminated and they should be integrated in national, sub-national and regional policy planning. Most success stories, in which some parallels can be drawn for future lessons, can change the entire discourse of disaster management.
It makes more sense to make predictable investments before a disaster than just focusing on response and relief, and this is not new for India. For example, take the earthquake in Anjar (Gujarat) in 1956. The best example of disaster risk reduction was in Gujarat, where the state government restored city construction after the earthquake and carried out a disaster-resistant construction. Half a century later, the 2001 Bhuj earthquake destroyed most of the houses in the town of Anjar, except for those at the site of its 1956 restoration. It provides a great example of mainstreaming disaster risk in the field of development. Unfortunately this was forgotten over time. We need to preserve and learn from our past experiences and use them to reduce vulnerabilities at national, regional and local levels.
In the 2001 Kutch, (Gujarat) earthquake, mainstreaming disaster risk reduction was a key principle in the long-term reconstruction programme, which was based on a strategy such as Build Back Better led to the reinstatement program. It was also awarded the United Nations Sasakawa Prize and has been recognized globally.
Several economic and financial studies have described the needs and benefits of disaster risk reduction. According to an estimate by UNESCO, today only $4 out of every $100 allocated for humanitarian aid is being spent on risk mitigation measures, despite the research being done on disaster risk reduction. Contribute to saving a significant amount. To reduce the negative effects of human activity on the environment and to build the capacity of vulnerable populations to protect themselves from natural hazards, disaster risk reduction should be an important aspect of global poverty reduction initiatives in the coming years. needed.
Sendai Framework 2015-2030
The Sendai Framework is the successor to the Hugo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. The International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction of the HFA, 1989, the International Framework for Action and the Yokohama Strategy for a Safer Future: Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation and its Action Plan adopted in 1994 and the 1999 disaster Global continuing under the International Strategy for Reduction. To give further impetus, HFA was employed.
The Sendai Framework is built with elements that ensure continuity with the work done by states and stakeholders under the HFA and initiate a range of innovations, as decided during consultations and negotiations.
Many commentators emphasize disaster risk management rather than disaster management, the definition of seven global goals, a goal focused on preventing new risks in addition to disaster risk reduction as an expected outcome, mitigating existing risks and strengthening resilience. With the primary responsibility of the state to prevent and reduce disaster risk, etc., the most important change is the set of guiding principles, including all institutions of society and the state.
In addition, the focus on both natural and man-made hazards and their associated environmental, technological and biological hazards and risks has broadened the scope of disaster risk reduction. This document talks about promoting end-to-end health immunity. The Sendai Framework also clearly outlines the following issues: the need for a better understanding of all dimensions of disaster risk prevention, vulnerability and crisis, strengthening disaster risk governance including national forums, accountability for disaster management risk, ‘Build back quail’ readiness for, identification of stakeholders to new risks, health infrastructure, cultural heritage and workplace resilience, international cooperation and global partnerships, including financial assistance and loans from international financial institutions, and risk informed policies and programmes. The new National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP) will maximize our country’s capacity to deal with disasters at all levels by integrating disaster risk reduction into development activities in all sectors. The NDMP will also take into account global trends in disaster management and incorporate the approach suggested in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, of which India is a signatory.
It is important to make predictable risk mitigation investments in development planning to reduce the impact of disaster in resource-scarce nations/states. It would be a prudent step to move towards risk informed decisions for making investments. Projects planned for the future in high disaster prone areas should compulsorily account for disaster risk. Investment, whether private or public, should be based on the fundamental principles of protecting development achievements and gaining resilience. There should be a comprehensive and a more people-centred preventive approach to disaster risk. Disaster risk reduction actions need to be inclusive and accessible in order to be efficient and effective. The government should involve the concerned stakeholders, especially the private sector, in the formulation and implementation of policies, plans and standards, along with facilitation and incentives. To make it inclusive, there is a need to include women as leaders and youth, children, civil society and academia. At the same time, all states should integrate scientific and research institutions to work together and create opportunities for cooperation, and the business sector should integrate disaster risk into its management so that the Sustainable Development Goals can be achieved.