Answer

The Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill 2024 proposes structural changes emphasizing centralized decision-making, raising concerns about sidelining local stakeholders. Grassroot participation, essential for disaster preparedness and community resilience, may be undermined. Recent disasters like the 2023 Sikkim floods highlight the critical role of local governance in early response. A balanced approach is vital for regional coordination and inclusivity.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Centralization of Power and Lack of Grassroot Participation

• Guarded Terminology: The Bill’s use of terms like ‘monitor’ over ‘supervise’ limits community trust and weakens participatory governance.
  For example: Local terms in the Sendai Framework promote active community roles, enhancing disaster response capacities in vulnerable regions like Sundarbans.
• Exclusion of Local Entities: Panchayats, NGOs, and local governments are marginalized, despite being vital in early disaster responses.
  For example: Villagers in Kerala floods (2018) rescued individuals before formal agencies reached, showcasing local involvement as critical for timely action.
• Omission of Performance Metrics: No evaluation mechanisms for district authorities discourages accountability and proactive disaster readiness.
  For example: Ineffective preparation during Cyclone Fani (2019) by Odisha’s local officials delayed critical relief operations, highlighting the need for district-level assessments.
• Lack of Inclusion in Hazard Definitions: Definitions ignore local community wisdom and capabilities for disaster resilience and vulnerability mitigation.
  For example: Tamil Nadu’s fisherfolk in tsunami (2004) leveraged traditional knowledge to evacuate areas, minimizing loss in coastal settlements.
• Speciesism and Animal Welfare Ignored: Animals, essential in livelihoods and ecosystems, are absent in disaster management provisions.
  For example: Loss of cattle during Kedarnath floods (2013) disrupted agricultural recovery, underlining gaps in animal disaster preparedness.

Negative Impact on Disaster Preparedness, Local Governance, and Regional Cooperation

• Weakening Disaster Preparedness: Top-down policies exclude community input, reducing efficiency in early disaster response mechanisms.
  For example: Cyclone Aila (2009) showed effective community-driven evacuation plans outperforming delayed responses from central authorities.
• Reduced Local Governance Role: Absence of panchayats and urban bodies limits their contributions to disaster risk mitigation efforts.
  For example: Local planning in Gujarat’s Kachchh earthquake (2001) helped rebuild resilient communities, avoiding similar central control risks.
• Intersectional Vulnerabilities Ignored: Gender, caste, and disability-related challenges are overlooked, marginalizing already vulnerable populations.
  For example: Relief operations in Chennai floods (2015) neglected slum women’s needs, worsening their post-disaster recovery conditions.
• Undermined Regional Collaboration: Lack of emphasis on transnational coordination disregards porous borders and shared vulnerabilities in South Asia.
  For example: SAARC’s rapid response agreement (2011) could aid Nepal’s 2015 earthquake recovery but remains unleveraged by India.
• Urban Disaster Challenges Unaddressed: Urban flooding risks grow with unchecked encroachments and poor planning, exacerbated by UDMA’s unclear roles.
  For example: Encroachments caused massive waterlogging during Mumbai floods (2005), impacting millions.

Measures for a More Inclusive Framework

• Strengthening Grassroot Institutions: Empower panchayats, NGOs, and local governments to engage actively in disaster planning and execution.
  For example: Gujarat’s community-driven reconstruction post-2001 earthquake enabled robust recovery and future disaster resilience.
• Intersectional Focus: Mandate relief frameworks accounting for marginalized groups’ vulnerabilities to ensure equitable post-disaster recovery.
  For example: Relief programs for widows and lower castes in Odisha’s cyclones improved inclusivity and livelihood restoration efforts.
• Integration of Animal Welfare: Include animal rescue and welfare in disaster preparedness frameworks to secure rural livelihoods.
  For example: Livestock rescue initiatives post Kerala floods (2018) helped farmers rebuild economies quickly.
• Regional Coordination Mechanisms: Leverage regional bodies like SAARC for shared disaster strategies and mutual support systems.
  For example: Enhanced cooperation post Nepal earthquake (2015) could have accelerated rescue efforts with Indian support.
• Transparent Evaluation Systems: Institute performance-based metrics for district and state authorities to enhance accountability and preparedness.
  For example: Rajasthan’s disaster drills pre-Thar cyclone warnings ensured timely, evaluated action plans.
• Localized Urban Planning: Align urban disaster strategies with environmental sustainability by conserving aquifers, water bodies, and forests.
  For example: Chennai’s wetland conservation projects mitigated flood impacts during urban monsoons.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

To ensure robust disaster management, the amended bill must balance centralized efficiency with grassroots inclusivity. Empowering local bodies, fostering regional cooperation in South Asia, and leveraging technology can enhance preparedness. A participatory framework integrating vulnerable communities and transparent governance will not only address immediate risks but also build resilience for a sustainable and equitable future.