26 December 2024 : The Hindu Editorial Analysis

1. The lapses in the disaster management Bill

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 9)

Topic: GS3 – Disaster management

Context

The Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, modifies the Disaster Management Act, 2005, but has raised concerns about its top-down approach, lack of inclusivity, and accountability. It excludes key provisions for relief measures and ignores the role of local communities. The Bill also misses opportunities for regional and international collaboration.

 Key Concerns Raised

• Shift from Participatory Governance
  • The Bill replaces inclusive governance under the Disaster Management Act (DMA), 2005, with a top-down approach.
  • It uses terms like “monitor” and “guidelines” instead of fostering trust with local communities through “supervision” and “direction.”
• Undermining Local Communities
  • Global frameworks like the Yokohama Strategy, Hyogo Framework, and Sendai Framework highlight local communities as “first responders.”
  • The Bill ignores the vital roles of local communities, panchayats, and NGOs, which have historically been at the forefront of disaster response (e.g., Kerala floods, Kedarnath disaster).

Gaps in Inclusivity and Evaluation

• Intersectional Discrimination
  • The Bill lacks provisions addressing vulnerabilities of women, disabled individuals, marginalized castes, and LGBTQIA communities.
  • Ignoring intersectional challenges reduces its claim to inclusiveness.
• Performance Evaluation
  • No mechanisms exist for evaluating district authorities’ disaster preparedness.
  • Failure to address accountability fosters opportunities for political exploitation.

Key Highlights of the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024

Preparation of Plans: Disaster management plans will now be prepared by NDMA and SDMA, instead of the National and State Executive Committees. Enhanced Functions: NDMA and SDMA will periodically assess disaster risks, provide technical assistance, recommend relief standards, and prepare disaster databases. Disaster Database: Mandates comprehensive national and state-level disaster databases. Urban Disaster Management Authorities: State governments can establish Urban Disaster Management Authorities for state capitals and cities with municipal corporations. State Disaster Response Force (SDRF): States can constitute SDRFs with defined functions and terms of service. Statutory Status: National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) and High-Level Committee (HLC) are given statutory status. Appointments: NDMA can specify staff and appoint experts with central government approval.

Omission of Key Provisions

• Accountability and Relief Measures
  • Sections 12, 13, and 19 of the DMA, which mandated minimum standards for relief and special provisions for widows, orphans, and the homeless, have been removed.
  • Provisions ensuring loan repayment relief and ex gratia assistance are missing without replacements.
• Preparedness and Integration
  • Sections 35(2b) and 35(2d), ensuring integration and preparedness in disaster management plans, have been omitted.
  • State Executive Committees (SECs) are no longer required to prepare for disasters effectively, as Sections 22(2a) and 22(2b) are deleted.

Flaws in Good Governance and Speciesism

• Neglect of Animals
  • The Bill fails to address disaster-related deaths of animals.
  • It overlooks implementing the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, for disaster preparedness.
• Urban Disaster Management Authority (UDMA)
  • The creation of UDMA lacks clarity in its purpose.
  • Municipal Corporations, responsible for urban development, often exacerbate flooding through encroachments on natural resources.

Missed Opportunities in Regional Collaboration

• Global and Regional Synergy
  • The Bill fails to incorporate international collaboration mechanisms, ignoring groupings like SAARC, BIMSTEC, and BRICS.
  • The absence of references to the 2011 SAARC Agreement on Rapid Response to Natural Disasters highlights its oversight of regional disaster strategies.

Conclusion

• The Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, weakens the foundational principles of participatory governance, inclusivity, accountability, and preparedness established by the DMA, 2005.
• Its omissions and top-down approach limit its effectiveness in addressing disaster management comprehensively.

PYQ: Indian Constitution exhibits centralising tendencies to maintain unity and integrity of the nation. Elucidate in the perspective of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897; The Disaster Management Act, 2005 and recently passed Farm Acts. (250 words/15m) (UPSC CSE (M) GS-2 2020)

Practice Question:  Critically analyze the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, with a focus on its implications for inclusivity, accountability, and regional collaboration in disaster governance. (250 Words /15 marks)

 

2. The lessons from a spectrum of areas

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 8)

Topic: GS3 – Disaster Management

Context

The 2004 tsunami highlighted critical lessons in disaster management, especially regarding environmental conservation, equitable relief, and socio-economic resilience. It exposed vulnerabilities caused by mangrove destruction, privatisation, and social inequalities. The disaster underscored the need for gender-sensitive policies, community engagement, and sustainable practices to mitigate future risks effectively.

 Role of Mangroves and Natural Protection

• Mangroves act as vital natural buffers against waves, protecting coastal areas.
• Large-scale destruction of mangroves for shrimp farming, tourism, and wood needs has disrupted ecosystems.
• Artificial barriers often increase vulnerability to waves rather than providing protection.

Social Changes Due to Privatisation

• In Thailand, privatisation of coastlines displaced local communities, leading to informal sector employment and economic vulnerabilities.
• The development of hotels and leisure activities altered traditional labour patterns, contributing to the rise of the sex industry.
• These changes serve as a cautionary tale for India about the risks of privatisation and social disruption.

Economic Inequalities and Resource Exploitation

• Post-tsunami market disruptions benefited asset owners while disadvantaging traditional livelihoods.
• Mechanised fishing replaced artisanal practices, worsening over-fishing, waste accumulation, and resource degradation.
• Local economies suffered as externally sourced goods replaced local products.
• These economic challenges, aggravated by privatisation and liberalisation, require targeted interventions, yet remain understudied.

Inequitable Relief and Rehabilitation

• Relief efforts often mirrored pre-existing inequalities and excluded vulnerable groups such as Dalits, tribes, immigrants, and single women.
• Undocumented migrants faced challenges in receiving aid and medical attention due to legal constraints.
• Asset-based damage assessments favoured wealthier segments, while fishing labourers and other vulnerable groups received minimal assistance.
• Disproportionate aid distribution highlighted systemic inequities in disaster responses.

Gender-Insensitive Policies

• Women’s roles in fishing communities, such as processing and marketing fish, were overlooked during rehabilitation.
• Relief packages often excluded women due to male-dominated fish worker panchayat lists and lack of property ownership.
• Widows faced additional barriers in receiving aid due to lack of identification documents.
• Addressing social divisions is critical to equitable relief and rehabilitation measures.

Importance of Local Structures

• Relief agencies often undermined community-based institutions by imposing external democratic practices.
• Coastal communities like kuppams operate through active debate rather than elections, fostering resilience and inclusivity.
• Long-term engagement with local structures is essential to addressing gender and social concerns effectively.

Conclusion

• These lessons emphasize the need for inclusive, locally-driven approaches to disaster management, addressing systemic inequalities and respecting community structures.

PYQ: In December 2004, tsunami brought havoc on 14 countries including India. Discuss the factors responsible for the occurrence of Tsunami and its effects on life and economy. In the light of guidelines of NDMA (2010) describe the mechanisms for preparedness to reduce the risk during such events. (250 words/15m) (UPSC CSE (M) GS-3 2017)

Practice Question:  Examine the role of natural ecosystems and community-based institutions in disaster management, citing lessons from the 2004 tsunami. Discuss how socio-economic inequalities and gender insensitivity impact relief and rehabilitation efforts in post-disaster scenarios. (250 Words /15 marks)

3. Nagapattinam’s journey of resilience

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 8)

Topic: GS IV – Ethics (Case study)

Context

The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami devastated Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, exposing gaps in disaster preparedness. The recovery efforts transformed the region into a model of resilience, driving policy reforms and institutional advancements.

 Case Study: Nagapattinam and the 2004 Tsunami

Background

• The Indian Ocean tsunami of December 26, 2004, devastated Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, with 73 habitations along its 187.9-kilometre-long coastline severely affected.
• The disaster exposed the absence of early warning systems and inadequate disaster preparedness in the region.

Response and Recovery Efforts

• Initial Response: Area-specific rescue teams, supported by the Indian Army, Navy, and local volunteers, facilitated efficient rescue operations.
• Health and Sanitation: Rapid disposal of bodies and disinfection measures were prioritised to prevent disease outbreaks.
• Temporary Shelters: Over 13,000 shelters were established to house displaced families, restoring safety and dignity.
• Holistic Recovery: Infrastructure such as electricity, water supply, and roads was restored swiftly.

Rehabilitation and Resilience Building

• Housing: 55,000 multi-hazard-resistant homes were constructed with integrated risk insurance.
• Livelihoods: Coastal communities received strengthened infrastructure, alternative livelihoods, and market access.
• Education: Schools and anganwadi centres were upgraded as disaster-safe environments.
• Community Involvement: Over 400 NGOs worked with local communities to deliver essential services and foster ownership.

Key Takeaways

• Policy Impact: The disaster catalysed the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and institutional developments like the NDMA.
• Technological Advancements: Real-time monitoring systems, AI-driven risk assessments, and GIS mapping now strengthen disaster preparedness.
• Global Lessons: India can learn from Chile and Japan’s proactive measures, including risk reduction investments and strict building codes.

Conclusion

The Nagapattinam experience underscores the importance of embedding disaster risk reduction in development planning and ensuring sustainable resilience measures for long-term preparedness.

For more such UPSC related Current Affairs, Check Out: 24 December 2024 : The Hindu Editorial Analysis