Despite the fact that the country is vulnerable to all kinds of disasters including floods, droughts and earthquakes, the recent floods of 2010-11 which affected 16.7 million population further exposed the country’s disaster related vulnerabilities. Disaster Contingency Planning Process at the federal, provincial and district level in the country has been found to be flawed.
This had been disclosed in a “Civil Society Disaster Situation Report” issued here by the Peoples Accountability Commission on Floods (PACF), a network of flood affected communities, their representatives and the civil society in the province of Sindh.
The disaster situation report titled ‘Reviews of Federal, Provincial and District level Contingency Planning in Pakistan’ had further disclosed that the process of the preparation of the contingency plans at the federal, provincial and district level were not participatory and the plan documents lacked international standards and the accepted principles put down in the contingency plan.
According to the PACF report, National Monsoon Contingency Plan 2012 developed by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) anticipated in the plan that 29.2 million population were in need of the relief support initiatives, where as rescue and evacuation was planned for 1.46 million population according to the worst case scenario laid down in the plan. In addition to this, there was no concrete plan about the provision of relief for the extra population of 27.74 million which may not be relocated but would certainly be affected as per NDMA plan anticipation.
The report also claimed that the national document lacked a response strategy, operational support and that there was data dependency of NDMA on the provincial disaster management authorities with regard to the identification of vulnerable points, the process of hazard and risk mapping at UC, taluka and district level, therefore proving that the plan was nothing more than just a piece of paper.
The report says that the Provincial Monsoon/floods Contingency Plan 2012 drafted by the Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA) Sindh was lacking factual data based on the scientific survey and the feedback of the local civil societies. The provincial level plan was supposed to reflect the findings provided by district level contingency plans whereas most of the district contingency plans of 2012 possessed old data and seemed to be copies of the old plans. The sources of the data of the Provincial Contingency Plan were vague and flawed.
The PACF report added that in the Sindh Monsoon Contingency Plan 2012 more than one hundred vulnerable UCs and more than two hundred vulnerable points had been identified on river embankments, natural dhoras and canals in sixteen specified districts while there was no mention of the same vulnerable points in the contingency plan of the Sindh Irrigation and Drainage Authority (SIDA) plan which showed lack of coordination between PDMA and SIDA. The PACF report added that the provincial government was not ensuring sufficient administration, financial human resources, information and telecommunication support to the districts to mitigate losses of disaster risk hazards.
According to the report, District Disaster Contingency Plans were more important in a sense that they unfolded the ground situation at grass root level and contributed in the development of provincial and national plans. Based on the research it was found that majority of the monsoon contingency plans like District Sanghar, Mirpurkhas, Kamber Shadadkot, Dadu and Thatta were the exact replicas of the 2011 plans. The general public and civil societies based on the district level had neither been consulted in the plan preparedness process nor had they been aware about the existence of such a contingency plan in the district.
The PACF report also states that there was a lack of real data base at UC level with regard to the mapping of hazards, risks, financial and human recourses with the effective District Disaster Management Authority (DDMA). District Monsoon Contingency Plans did not define or miss the budget to carry on the operational support and preparedness plan with regard to rescue and relief services. There was a lack of effective interdepartmental coordination at the district and the provincial levels to respond with integrated approach to mitigate risks of natural disasters like drought, monsoon flooding, river floods, flash floods, and cyclone in the disaster prone districts of the province.
According to the report, the disaster management authorities working at district, provincial and national levels were less equipped with edible and inedible items, comprehensive database, were devoid of rosters and inventories, had invisible and dysfunctional control rooms, lacked public participation, unattended repair of irrigation vulnerable points and absence of effective interdepartmental and humanitarian coordination to respond in a worst case scenario for a targeted caseload of 29.2 million people.
The report added that in the District Contingency Plans, roles and responsibilities of the related departments were identified but in practice the situation was found to be inverted and there was a lack of coordination and information sharing between departments concerned to be prepared to take effective preemptive measures to combat the natural disasters and mitigate losses. Besides, there had been claims from various quarters that the district level control rooms had been operational (24 hours) from 1st July 2011.
The control rooms would be the district focal points for flood response and would essentially perform coordination and information management functions. Based on the field observations during the mentioned study, control rooms were not seen to be functioning and the concerned communities did not know about the contact number and the location of the established control rooms. The report concluded with a recommendation that the National Disaster Contingency plan should be prepared with a participatory approach by involving the disaster affected communities, the civil society and other key stakeholders. The PDMA Sindh should develop the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) guidelines for the preparation of district disaster contingency plans to mitigate losses arising due to natural calamities.
The contingency plans prepared by the districts should be translated into the local language for educating the communities about the possible actions to be taken during the onset of an emergency so that the common man could respond accordingly. The Monsoon Contingency Plans 2012 of the districts, Monsoon Contingency Plan of SIDA and Sindh Monsoon Contingency Plan 2012 of the Sindh relief department should be displayed on the official website of the PDMA and other related departments so that information could be shared with all the stakeholders for receiving meaningful inputs. Besides, the participation of all the concerned stakeholders including the media, local NGOs, the civil society and the social activists should be assured in the contingency plans developed at the district level so that common consensus and understanding could be developed to respond to emergency situation with the help of the general public and the humanitarian partners.
