Inconvenient democracy

Disaster risk management policies in Pakistan

It is a universally held belief that climate change affects the economic development in various ways, it particularly influences the agrarian economies which are subject to vagaries of nature and climate. Variations in temperature, precipitation averages and extreme climate events adversely impinge on crop-yield and income, and also affect health, social and physical safety of the people. This way climate change affects the whole development process. Various studies have shown that increase in severity and frequency of floods, droughts, heatwaves and variation in rainfall patterns are all outcomes of climate change phenomenon. In fact, climate change has become a rising global phenomenon and no country on this planet including Pakistan stands immune to its harsh affects.

It is quite alarming that Pakistan ranks first out of ten most affected countries in the global climate risk index (2012) and 75^th in the global food security index (2013). Being home to almost 500 glaciers and several rain-laden weather systems, coupled with its sloppy topography, make Pakistan very vulnerable to extreme water related incidents. It is alarming to note that this year Pakistan has continued to suffer colossal losses for the fifth consecutive time when it has been hit by high rainfall and flash floods. It is even more serious to note that Pakistan government has been caught napping, as usual. On the other hand, quick succession of flood related disasters has reduced the resilient capacity of people who are already mired in abject poverty and illiteracy. The word ‘government’ is of no use to them as governments do not give due attention to develop long run disaster risk management policies in Pakistan.

The history of climate change governance in the modern world proves that only the democratic societies have necessary potential to develop as climate change risk resilient states as public friendly democratic systems reduce the vulnerability of disaster risks. Policy makers in different democracies take a large share of their population into account for the development of natural disaster risk management policies. As a result of this democratic process, disaster resilience becomes a “normal good” instead of “public good” which can be only accessed by rich and influential segments of the society. Every tier of the democratic governance, starting from the local government system, acts as a vibrant safeguard against natural disasters to minimise its negative impact on the wellbeing of the hoi polloi of the society. World experiences have shown that true democracies, if they are free from inefficiency, nepotism and corruption, strengthen the social contracts between government and its people; and this leads to minimise the risk and disaster scale of natural climate events.

Unfortunately, this argument does not hold true in case of Pakistan. For example, both Punjab and Sindh provinces are considered as the bread-baskets of Pakistan due to their rich and fertile lands. These two provinces alone provide 92 per cent of food to the people in Pakistan. It is very unfortunate to note that both the provinces are run by the political parties which are in power for more than three decades but even then “democratic stock” has miserably failed to develop and adopt any consistent water policy to manage water related disasters. Punjab is dynastically ruled by right wing politicians, headed by ‘Sharifs of Raiwind’ who have vast business concerns inside and outside of Pakistan. The political rule of People’s Party of Pakistan over Sindh province dates back to 1972 when legendry ZA Bhutto came into power after the breakup of Pakistan in 1971. Both the parties have many ostensible political differences and their political leadership remained at loggerheads for a long time but their track record regarding floods and drought management is the same. Both have miserably failed to manage the flood water for the collective cause.

Pakistan’s flood history dating from 1950 to 2014 is based on risk acceptance instead of risk aversion and management. In the absence of any consistent national water policy, important issues like flood risk planning, creation of regulatory zones and watershed management are long ignored and no effective policies are developed are fixed for them. Every year, flash floods, extending beyond provincial boundaries, call for adopting effective flood management policy so that this natural disaster could be converted into a big boon for the general public. It is even more excruciating that the 18^th amendment has left the provinces confused about their role and responsibilities in flood water management, especially who would take care of flood waters when it enters from one province to other province’s boundary.

It is pitiable to note that the successive democratic governments in Pakistan have failed to hold local bodies elections which are base of disaster risk management. On the other hand, local government system has been strengthened during dictatorial regimes in Pakistan. Now, the people have started thinking that democracy is only an elite group’s autocracy which has strong influence on development and implementation of policies including disaster risk management. Therefore, super flood of 2010 in Pakistan is referred to as “Political Flood” as political elites used their influences to divert flood water towards the lands of marginalised people. Autocratic elite group’s sham democracy stands naked every year when political leaders, clad in starched cotton dresses and alighting from state owned chauffeur-driven limousines, visit the marooned people and distributes food bags instead of developing long-run disaster risk aversion and management policies and minimizing the disasters by strengthening local government system.

Their Frankenstein posture before cameras with sufferers around doesn’t give any benefit to the marooned. The democratic setups have also failed to equip the civil administration with necessary tool kits to rescue the stranded people. Pakistan army always has to play a role of a Messiah to rescue such people. This situation proves that current style of democracy might not be working for Pakistan. In Pakistan the current style of democracy is not synonymous to ‘good disaster risk management governance’.

In the context of climate change risk and disaster reduction system debate, Pakistan should be taken as a case study to analyse why successive democratic governments have failed to pay due attention to managing disasters through effective long term policies. This 2014 flood should also be an eye opener for the people of Pakistan to think over reorientation of their “sham democracy” which has hitherto failed to deliver.