By: Hira Habib AERC (Morn. 2010-11) Submitted to Ms. Samina Khalil (Environmental Economics course instructor) 24th Jan. , 2012 THE WORLD REALIZED; CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL Climate change is not a crisis of developing countries’ making, yet the Impacts of global warming will disproportionately hit the world’s poorest people. In 1997, the majority of the world’s nations embarked on the international climate change mitigation regime. It was realized that environmental problems are worse than it was realized.
Lately, talks about new climate change deal received lot more media coverage than it used to have. If we accept the fact that climate change is indeed the biggest environmental problem of these all, the problem that could do significant damage to our planet and make life extremely difficult for our future generations then this should be really the highest interest of them all. If Earth is still our only home, and it still definitely is, then we should do everything that is in our capacity to ensure this home would be kind to our future generations as it has been kind to us.
This potential new climate change deal gives world leaders unique opportunity to show that world can be united when global issues are the main and common subject; it has ability to show that countries can overcome the difference in their opinions and interests when something should be done on global level. Climate change issue is far too important issue to let petty interests move us away from new climate deal. The only thing that matters today is to acknowledge climate change problem, and do everything that is in our capacity to not to make it worse.
Only very recently has the world realized that climate change and its impacts are a result of anthropocentric activities that make voracious use of our earth’s natural resources and now our scientists are in the field every day, exploring environmental threats. Major global consensus of the Kyoto protocol and the formation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), were critical steps in mainstreaming the issue of climate change.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): In 1992, countries joined an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to cooperatively consider what they could do to limit average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and to cope with whatever impacts were, by then, inevitable. By 1995, countries realized that emission reductions provisions in the Convention were inadequate. They launched negotiations to strengthen the global response to climate change, and, two years later, adopted the Kyoto Protocol.
The Kyoto Protocol legally binds developed countries to emission reduction targets. The Protocol’s first commitment period started in 2008 and ends in 2012. Kyoto protocol: The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005.
The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh in 2001, and are called the “Marrakesh Accords. ” The Kyoto Protocol is generally seen as an important first step towards a truly global emission reduction regime that will stabilize GHG emissions, and provides the essential architecture for any future international agreement on climate change. The major distinction between the Protocol and the Convention is that while the Convention encouraged industrialized countries to stabilize GHG emissions, the Protocol commits them to do so.
Recognizing that developed countries are principally responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions in the atmosphere as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity, the Protocol places a heavier burden on developed nations under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities. ” By the end of the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012, a new international framework needs to have been negotiated and ratified that can deliver the stringent emission reductions the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has clearly ndicated are needed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) IPCC is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was formed in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), two organizations within the United Nations to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. Where does Pakistan Stand?
On 11 January 2005, Pakistan submitted its instruments of accession to the Kyoto Protocol. The Ministry of Environment assigned the task to work as designated national authority (DNA). According to a news story by Khan (2009), it was expected that the Protocol would help Pakistan lower dependence on fossil fuels through renewable energy projects. In the recent decades the temperature over Pakistan has witnessed accelerated jumps in temperature compared to the global change in temperatures: the temperature of 53. degree Celsius in Mohenjo-Daro broke the previous world records in May 2010 by breaking the last highest temperature recorded in 1919 with 53 degree Celsius in Jacobabad, a severe cyclonic storms Phet hit the Arabian Sea in May 2010 and the Gonu & the Yamyin hit the Arabian Sea, which is very rare phenomenon in the history of the Arabian Sea. In 2007, temperature in Lahore broke the record of 78 years; it is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent.
It is very likely that there will be more precipitation at higher latitudes and there will be less precipitation in most subtropical land areas and it is likely that tropical cyclones like typhoons and hurricanes will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and heavier precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical sea surface temperatures. Realizing the threats and challenges, the Government of Pakistan is in the process of finalizing the National Climate Change Policy and Disaster Management Plans, which will surely help in addressing the threats posed by climate change and natural disasters in the near future.
What Climate Change has brought to Pakistan? “Pakistan is highly disaster-prone, with two major disasters in the past five years alone, yet major losses are not inevitable” Neva Khan — Oxfam’s Country Director in Pakistan Global Climatic Changes have brought Pakistan in line of the countries standing on the verge of extreme Dangers of Natural Disasters. What is happening in Pakistan cannot be described in a single word – like disaster or catastrophe.
There is a combination of climate, weather, population, societal capacity, and geopolitics whose scope and ramifications are far beyond a “historic flood. ” Environmentalists are blaming climate change for the unprecedented massive monsoon rains in Pakistan, which so far this year have affected eight million people, claiming 350 lives and damaging 1. 3 million homes. Pakistan has witnessed swift climate change because of rising temperature and flooding downpours in the past two years.
Climate experts consider this unexpected change as a part of broader regional climate changes also happening in the neighboring countries. Pakistan feels seriously concerned that several glaciers situated in Indian-administered Kashmir are shrinking, resulting in a recession in the levels of water that flow in rivers originating from these glaciers. As a result, agriculture has been badly affected while availability of water for drinking and other domestic purposes is also on decrease.
Pakistan’s water availability has decreased to 1,200 cubic meters per person from 5,000 cubic meters in 1947 and is forecast to drop to 800 cubic meters by 2020. A new Asian Development Bank study warns of the future displacement and migration of tens of millions of people in Asian countries by the effects of climate change, including rising sea levels, floods, droughts and reduced agricultural productivity. Climate Change in Pakistan is posing three big challenges relating to the water, food and energy security of the country.
However all these securities are interlinked and are dependent on each other. Currently, the stewardship of climate change rests with the Ministry of Environment; however the Planning Commission, and the Ministries of Water, Agriculture, and Industries, the National Disaster Management Authority, and others, along with civil society organizations should also play an active role in finalizing and implementing the climate change agenda. A Climate Change policy needs to be devised by taking into consideration the water, food and energy security of the country.
It should be done in a consultative manner in which all the relevant stakeholders are taken on board. Provincial opinions should also be taken while finalizing the CC policy. Provinces should make adaptation action plans in light of the national policy developed, which should be consistent with the existing ground realities; Technology no doubt is necessary but is not sufficient alone. The technocentric approach should be complemented by considering the social concerns as well.
Doing so would help in building the ownership of the campaign to counter the effects of climate change; The institutional capacity of different tiers of government should be built on adaptation measures side by side with the communities; The capacity building of vulnerable communities should also be done and adaptation measures should be adopted that are consistent with the socio-economic realities of the beneficiaries. A Review of Disaster Management System of Pakistan Disaster– international & global context:
Disasters are situations or events which devastate local capacity, necessitating a request to national or international level for assistance. These are classified into two main categories i. e. Natural disasters which are hydro-meteorological and Geophysical, and non-natural disasters which are man-made and can be industrial related; chemical spill, collapse of industrial structures, explosion, fire, gas leak poisoning, radiation; miscellaneous events such as collapse of domestic/non industrial structures, explosion, fire, and Transport related; air, rail, road and water-borne accidents (World Disasters Report).
Disasters and how they are managed, have become the subject of increasing research and debate in recent years. This heightened interest in disaster risk management signifies that the world has become a more dangerous place for its inhabitants who are becoming more vulnerable to disasters. The 2010 annual review of disaster figures based on the EM-DAT database outlines information about the EM-DAT International Disaster Database It reports that 385 natural hazard related disasters killed more than 297,000 people worldwide, affected over 217. million others and caused US$ 123. 9 billion of damages. A total of 131 countries were hit by these disasters, though only 10 countries accounted for 120 of the 385 disasters (31. 2%). Economic damages from natural hazard related disasters in 2010 (US$ 123. 9 billion) increased by 160. 4% compared to 2009, and were above the annual average damages for the period 2000-2009 (US$98. 9 billion). (Brussels-based Centre for research on the Epidemiology of Disasters-CRED) Disaster – national context:
Disaster in national context is a catastrophe or a calamity in an affected area, arising from natural or manmade causes or by accident which results in substantial loose of life or human suffering or damage to, or destruction of property. Historical context: People have rights not privilege in the wake of a disaster but legal barriers can hamper recovery, particularly for those living in poor temporary shelter long after the disaster.
Conflicting claims to property, lack of documentation, preferential treatment for owners over renters, incomplete land registers, discrimination against women and land grabbing have stood in the way of adequate recovery for current disaster victims in Pakistan. Geographically, Pakistan inherited disaster prone location that is vulnerable to varying hazards. Geological assessment unfolds a number of vulnerabilities faced by Pakistan, ranging from earthquakes, floods, droughts, cyclones, landslides, and sea based hazards.
In December 1974, an earthquake occurred in a remote and mountainous region of northern Pakistan, resulting in loss of lives and damage to property. In Jan. 1991 Pakistan was hit by another earthquake. In 2005 an earthquake measuring 7. 6 Richter scale was hit in the northern areas of Pakistan, affected 30,000 square km included a range of unprecedented damages and destruction of houses and government infrastructure. More than 78,000 people died and 50,000 injured due to this earthquake.
Apart from it Pakistan has suffered 18 floods followed by unusually high intensity rain spells Caused Rivers to overflow their banks during 1950, 1973, 1992, 2005 and 2010. During the period from 1950 to 2009, there was a total financial loss of US$ 20 billion, 8,887 people lost their lives, 109,822 villages were reportedly damaged / destroyed and an overall area of 407,132sq. km was affected. Moreover, 2010 flood alone resulted into a cumulative financial loss of US$ 10 billion, life loss of about 2000 people, 17,553 villages were reportedly damaged / destroyed and a total area of 160,000 sq. m was affected. Balloon burst of monsoon 2011, at the lower part of Sindh, caused a destructive rainfall, and faulty structure of L. B. O. D increased the numbers of flood victims. The inadequate existing discharge capacity of some important structures like barrages on River Indus, Chanab and Ravi are another reason of flooding in Pakistan. History of frequent disasters like frequent floods and earthquakes provoke the need of efficient disaster management mechanism in Pakistan.
Key challenges for disaster risk management in pakistan: Disaster is increasing in frequency, scale and impact: Global warming and climate change causes the frequency and severity of weather related hazards. During the last 60 years Pakistan faced eighteen major floods, 10,152 people lost their lives, country suffer cumulative loss of US$ 30 billion. Around 127,375 villages were destroyed / damaged, and a total area of 567,132 sq. km was affected. 2010 flood was the most destructive flood in Pakistan.
Disaster impacts are exacerbated by several factors, including increases in global population and unplanned urbanization growing settlement and investment in high risk coastal areas, deforestation, poor land-use management, inadequate enforcement of building codes and periodic economic fluctuations. Disasters disproportionately affect the poor. In 2010 flood approximately 90 percent of people killed from “Kacha area” The poorest people lived in small villages are the most vulnerable to disaster impacts and have the least capacity to reduce their risk exposure.
They are more likely to reside in marginal, hazard-prone locations, live and work in substandard buildings that cannot withstand stress, have limited livelihood options and food security, and poor access to social protection mechanisms. EARLIER DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES: Disaster management means managing the complete disaster spectrum including preparedness, response, recovery ;amp; rehabilitation and reconstruction. Pakistan’s disaster risk management to combat hazards can be described as casual and incoherent, largely focusing on reactive strategy of relief and response, inefficient when confronted with major disasters.
Key organizations like Federal Emergency Relief Cell (ERC), Federal Flood Commission (FFC), and Pakistan Metrological Department had been following the conventional relief and response oriented model for coping and managing risks of disaster. Till 2005 disaster risk management was fragmented and lacked inter organization communication. The Earth Quake 2005 changed Pakistan’s perceptions about how to manage disasters. Subsequently in 2005 Pakistan became a signatory of the international disaster risk reduction protocol, Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-15.
National Disaster Management Commission (NDMC) was formed to combat disaster risk, with National disaster Management Authority (NDMA) in 2006. Primary objective of NDMC was to achieve sustainable social, economic and environmental development in Pakistan through reducing risks and vulnerabilities, particularly those of the poor and marginalized groups, and by effectively responding to and recovering from disaster impact. Priority areas of action have been identified to establish and strengthen capacities include: * Institutional and legal arrangements for Disaster Risk Management * Hazard and vulnerability assessment Training, education and awareness * Disaster risk management planning * Community and local level programming * Multi-hazard early warning system * Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction into development * Emergency response system * Capacity development for post disaster recovery Legal Frame work of Disaster Risk Management in Pakistan Historical legal framework of Pakistan is given as below: Civil Defence Act 1952 (XXXI of 1952) / 1993.
Initially this act empower the Civil Defense structure of Pakistan, “Civil Defence includes any measures not amounting to actual combat, for affording defense against any form of hostile attack by a foreign power or for depriving any form of hostile attack by a foreign power of its effect wholly or in part, whether such measures are taken before during or after the time of the attack. It also includes remedial measures against natural or man-made disaster in peace time”. This act was further amended in 1993 to ensure remedial measure against natural and manmade disasters during peace time.
The West Pakistan National Calamities (Prevention ;amp; Relief Act 1958). This act provides for the maintenance and restoration of order in areas affected by certain calamities and for the prevention and control of and relief against calamities; or any other calamity which, in the opinion of Government warrants action under this Act. Local Government Act 2001. Local Government Act 2001 devolved the disaster management subject at district, tehsil and union council level. According to this act disaster’ includes famine, flood, cyclone, fire, earthquake, drought, and damages caused by force majeure;
National Disaster Management Act 2010. This Act XXIV of 2010 to provide the establishment of National Disaster management System for Pakistan. It is expedient to provide an effective disaster management system based on Hyogo frame work of action at federal, provincial and district level. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) is the key instrument for implementing disaster risk reduction, adopted by the Member States of the United Nations. Its overarching goal is to build resilience of nations and communities to disasters, by achieving substantive reduction of disaster losses by 2015 – n lives, and in the social, economic, and environmental assets of communities and countries. The HFA offers five areas of priorities for action, guiding principles and practical means for achieving disaster resilience for vulnerable communities 1. Make Disaster Risk Reduction a Priority: 2. 1. Create effective multi-sector national platform to provide policy guidelines ;amp; coordination mechanism; 2. 2. Integrate disaster risk reduction into development policies ;amp; planning; 2. 3. Ensuring community participation. 2. Know the Risk and Take Action: 3. 4.
Identify access and monitor disaster risk and enhance early warning 3. Build Understanding ;amp; Awareness: 4. 5. Providing relevant information on disaster risk ;amp; means of protection; especially for citizens in high risk areas. 4. 6. Strengthen networks and promoting dialogues and cooperation among disaster experts, technical and scientific specialist s, planner and other stakeholders; 4. 7. Include disaster risk reduction subject matter in formal, non formal and informal education ;amp; training activities; 4. 8. Developing or strengthening community based disaster risk management programs; 4. . Working with the media in disaster risk reduction awareness activities. 4. Reduce Risk: 5. 10. Reduce the underlying risk factors: 5. 11. 1. Vulnerabilities to natural hazards is increased in many ways for example: 5. 11. 2. 1. Locating communities in hazards prone areas such as flood plains; 5. 11. 2. 2. Destroying forest and wet lands, thereby harming the capacity of the environment to wetland hazards; 5. 11. 2. 3. Building public facilities and housing unable to withstand the impact of hazards. 5. 11. 2. 4.
Not having social and financial safety mechanism in place. 5. Be Prepared and ready to Act: 6. 11. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels: 6. 12. 2. The development and regular testing of contingency plans; 6. 12. 3. The establishment of emergency funds to support, preparedness, response ;amp; recovery activities 6. 12. 4. The development of coordinated regional approaches for effective disaster response; 6. 12. 5. Continuous dialogue between response agencies, planners and policy makers, and development organizations.
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS IN PAKSIATN: There are various national, provincial and district departments working independently to address the issue of disaster in Pakistan. But disaster management act 2010 laid down the prime responsibility of disaster risk management on National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA) and District Disaster Management Authority (DDMA). National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA): NDMA has been made operational in 2007 to regulate, coordinate, develop systems and train manpower for disaster risk management.
The immediate priorities of NDMA are to collaborate with relevant stakeholders and to provide the minimum requirements in the relief camps in relation to shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation. NDMA faces numerous challenges like population growth, urbanization, industrialization, environmental change, and gender power imbalances that increase the vulnerability of population in disaster situation. The analysis of hazard risks, vulnerabilities and dynamic pressures bring home a scenario of more people living in and around hazard-prone areas.
New settlements would continue to spring-up with expanding population in hazard prone areas. At the other end, the frequency, severity and intensity of certain hazards is on the rise; e. g. droughts, flooding, soil erosion and landslides, resulting from environmental degradation and climate change. From these scenarios it could be concluded that disasters in future would be more frequent and their social, economic and environmental impacts higher than before. Regions that previously were not prone to certain hazards (e. g. droughts, flooding), may experience them in future.
Phase| Agency| Mitigation/ Prevention| | | Federal Flood Commission| | Provincial Irrigation Departments| | PEPCO/ Dams Safety Council| Preparedness ;amp; Response| | | Arm Forces| | Civil Defense| | Emergency Relief Cell| | Fire Services| | National Crises Management Cell| | Pakistan Metrological Department| | Police| | Provincial Communication ;amp; Works| | Provincial Food Department| | Provincial Health Department| | Provincial Relief Commissioners | | Provincial Agriculture ;amp; Livestock Department| | Rescue 1122| | Space and Upper Atmospheric Research Commission |
Recovery ;amp; Reconstruction| | | Earthquake Reconstruction ;amp; Rehabilitation Authority | | Provincial Irrigation Department| Role of NDMA was criticized in the past since it lacked unified disaster risk management structure. Absence of coordination and integration among organizations such as disaster management, development planning, and environmental management reduced the efficiency of NDMA into only rescue and relief. Table given below summarizes the details of organization working on disaster risk management on different phases:
Coordination among organizations during rescue and relief phase is important and most challenging job but during the rescue and relief phase of Flood 2010 NDMA was criticized due to lack of horizontal and vertical coordination amongst other stakeholders. Disaster risk management has close link with development sector and following list summarizes a list of national, regional and international protocols for disaster risk management but NDMA is struggling to build linkages with these policies and protocols within the policy frame work of disaster risk management. Agricultural Perspective and Policy * Convention for Biodiversity (CBD), June 1992 * Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC), June 1992 * Convention for Combating Desertification, October 1994 * SAARC Disaster Management Plan * ASEAN Regional Forum * Hyogo Framework of Action 2005-2015 * National Conservation Strategy 1992 * National Environment Action Plan (NEAP), 2001 * National Environment Policy 2005 * Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants , 2001 * Basel Convention on the control of Trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste and their disposal, 1994 July Vienna Convention for the Protection of Ozone layer and the Montreal * Protocol, December 1992 * Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper * National Water Policy, 2010 * UN’s Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998) Disaster Risk Management is a multi-dimensional subject and according to National Disaster Management Act 2010 NDMA is the focal and coordinating agency that institutionalized the Disaster Risk Management strategy into all relevant departments, divisions and ministries.
Priorities area of Disaster Risk Management includes Institutional and legal arrangements, National Hazards and Vulnerability assessment, Training, Education and Awareness of all stakeholders, Promoting Disaster Risk Management Planning, Community and Local Level Risk Reduction Programming, Multi Hazard Early Warning System, Emergency Response System, and Capacity Development of Post Disaster Recovery Being an intricate and time sensitive activity disaster risk management requires to be conducted as a one window operation through the NDMA.
However, on the flip side, each stakeholder must nominate a focal point for disaster risk management, who would be responsible for coordinating with NDMA, PDMA and DDMA. The role of NGOs is important in disaster management. Since NGOs can mobilize local communities and developing local level capacities in early warnings, disaster preparedness and response. NDMA encouraged NGOs to direct their funds towards Food, Shelter, Health relater projects. To ensure timely delivery of relief work, NGOs and INGOs are free to work in any disaster affected area in close coordination with the District Administration.
Details of working relationship of NGOs and INGOs with NDMA are given in (Annexure 1). Strategic Leader Forum led by NDMA, comprises PDMAs, DDMAs, government agencies, UN agencies, donors, Pakistan Humanitarian Forum (PHF), National Humanitarian Network (NHN), Pakistan Red Crescent Society (PRCS), military, philanthropist and media proved to be an effective coordination mechanism for rescue and relief activities during flood 2010. In the backdrop of eighteen constitutional amendments, the subject of Disaster Management has shifted to Provincial Disaster Risk Management and District Disaster Risk Management Authorities.
According to Flood Relief Learning ;amp; Experience 2010 Flood Management and capacity issues present serious challenge for Sindh and Punjab Disaster Management Authorities. Nevertheless, In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, people were trained over a period of time in best practices of camp management, food distribution and development of systems, the capacities that rarely existed in the south and this led to shortfalls and delay in response. This capacity was built up later but critical time was lost in the process.
The delay had a profound impact on providing rapid assistance to the affected people and increased their suffering. Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA): Provincial Disaster Management Commissions and Authorities are established in four Provinces of Pakistan under sub section (i) of Section 15 of the National Disaster Management Ordinance 2006. Provincial Disaster Management Authorities were established with the aim to formulate Provincial Disaster Management policies for each province.
Geological and environmental differences in four provinces, leads the government to assess vulnerabilities in each province and specify province specific measure of disaster. The performance of PDMAs (except Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) is criticized on many forums for example, the IDP crisis in 2009 had seen a mushrooming of INGOs and national NGOs and an alignment of donor support in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Warehouses, systems and networks were well established and when the 2010 floods struck, there was a comfort level in operating there for many organizations.
Conversely, Punjab and Sindh had not suffered such major emergencies in the recent past and systems were almost non-existent. Local NGOs in these two provinces had little knowledge on how to prepare documentation for donor funding, making it difficult if not impossible for them to receive support. INGOs were slow to move to the area and it was difficult for NDMA to encourage them to make the strategic shift to move or expand their operations from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa into southern parts of Punjab and Sindh.
District Disaster Management Authority DDMA: In 2007-08 District Disaster Management Authorities (DDMA) has been established in all the districts/agencies but priority given to the hazard prone areas. However, DDMAs remain weak and poorly resourced . The local level DM Authorities include Nazims, DCOs, police chiefs, civil defence, fire services, EDOs for agriculture, education, health, and works and rural development sectors. They would also include representatives of local Red Crescent societies, NGOs, civil society, private sector and media.
Mansehra and Badin examples highlight the significance of an integrated district response to disaster situations. In Manehra, it was important to minimize population dislocations. Therefore, role of Public Services and Water supply Department was critical in keeping lines of communication to vulnerable communities open and to keep their local water sources running. The Badin situation required an emergent response to save a significant stuck population in the coastal region, to feed them and to extricate affected people to safer locations.
This called for emergency resource mobilization for provision of food and arranging transport for affected population relocation, and for establishing emergency relief camps. Problems in Disaster Management System in Pakistan: Recent floods have exposed various shortfalls in existing National Disaster Management System. Despite the creation of disaster management platform at federal, provincial and district level it is criticized by duplication, complexity, lack of coordination and communication.
Existing framework fails to develop efficient linkages with relevant ministries, departments and directorates. The legal arrangement fails to identify and define relationship between key disaster related institutions. Parallel decision making bodies at national level, receiving the right kind of information for timely decision making remained another problem for the planner of NDMA. Lack of clarity for sharing information between civil and humanitarian stakeholders caused duplication and overlapping in distribution of relief goods.
Furthermore reactive response of NDMA is criticized on the event of disaster e. g. 2010 flood was a slow onset disaster but NDMA failed to rescue life and property of the vulnerable population lived in river plain areas of southern Punjab ;amp; Sindh . Disaster and relief departments largely remain under-resourced, untrained, and not given required importance within administrative hierarchy. Information gathering capacity of NDMA is obsolete because the only information they offers is the number of casualties in each province along with minimal estimate of damage to property.
Any vibrant system of live flood damage updates is conspicuously absent, or at least the information never timely travels bottom down to the masses. Inadequate land use planning as risk are not always considered above other criteria, therefore people lived near river plains and katcha area suffered loses/ damages of property. It is also alleged that wealthy feudal warlords and landowners in Pakistan had diverted funds and resources away from the poor and into their own private relief efforts. There were also allegations that local authorities colluded with the warlords to divert funds.
The floods accentuated Pakistan’s sharp class divisions. The wealthy, with better access to transportation and other facilities, suffered far less than the poor. NDMA has published Pakistan 2010 Flood Relief Learning from experience that summarizes a series of key recommendations for efficient Disaster Risk Management, given as under: * A comprehensive review of the National Disaster Management Act is needed to further strengthen it and provide complete clarity on mandates, and roles and responsibilities of NDMA, PDMAs and DDMAs and all relevant State actors.
In addition, accordant Rules of Business must be developed. * Efforts should be made to achieve consensus between the Federal and Provincial Governments on the NDMA’s lead coordination role in major disasters to avoid incoherence in disaster response. * A set of guidelines must be developed providing clear definition of roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders including Government Ministries/Departments, military, donors, UN agencies, humanitarian organizations, philanthropists and civil defence, in disaster response. A strategic planning network on disaster management comprising all key stakeholders including Government Ministries/Departments/agencies, PDMAs, DDMAs, military, civil response agencies (such as 1122), donors, UN, humanitarian communities (PHF, NHN, PRCS and others), and the media, should be established immediately to meet periodically (preferably quarterly in ‘peace’ time) to prepare for a cohesive response for all disasters. This will also help address shortfalls and also create a sense of ‘ownership’ among stakeholders. At the provincial level a shift in focus is required towards the capacity development of the PDMA’s of Punjab,
Sindh and Balochistan in terms of increased resource allocation, personnel training, warehousing and focal-point functionality. * At the district level, DDMAs require strengthening through the allocation of dedicated personnel and equipment as well as aligning them with the Revenue Department that has visibility down to the village level. An incident command system, as envisaged in the NDM Act 2010, needs to be operationalized for future disasters, comprising the national emergency operation center (NEOC), provincial emergency operation centres (PEOC), district emergency operation centres (DEOC), as well as representation from all key departments of government at federal, provincial and district level, armed forces, and the humanitarian community. * Standard Operating Procedures must be developed by NDMA in relation to the acceptance of unsolicited relief goods shipped by air or sea from abroad. Donors and major humanitarian actors need to assist the development of the capacity of local organizations for effective resource management, compliance with humanitarian standards, and result-oriented reporting to improve their eligibility for direct funding from donors. * GoP through NDMA, and provincial governments through their respective PDMAs, should create a permanent liaison with media, and institute training on disaster reporting for media. Housing, land and property rights in the wake of a disaster:
Even in the wake of a disaster, everyone benefited from basic human rights related to their housing, whether their homes have been damaged, destroyed or occupied by others. According to the UN’s Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998), the “competent authorities have the primary duty and responsibility to establish conditions, as well as to provide the means, which allow internally displaced persons to return voluntarily in safety and with dignity to their homes or places of habitual residence, or to resettle voluntarily in another part of the country. In carrying out this duty, the UN’s “Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters” (2008) recommend that: • “The return of persons or communities displaced by the natural disaster to their property and possessions should be facilitated as soon as possible. • Owners, whose land deeds or property documents have been lost or damaged during the natural disaster or whose land boundaries have been destroyed, should be provided with accessible procedures to re-claim ownership of their original land and property without undue delay. Legal procedures should be put in place to consider competing claims to land and property with due process guarantees and without delay. Access to an independent court or tribunal should be guaranteed if the decision is not accepted by both parties. • Specific arrangements should be made to enable women, particularly widows, as well as orphaned children to (re-) claim housing, land or property and to acquire housing or land title deeds in their own name. Specific arrangements should be made to enable and facilitate recognition of claims to land title and ownership based on prolonged possession, in the absence of formal land titles, especially for indigenous peoples. ” Disasters in Asia: the case for legal preparedness 2010: Sequence of Actions NGOs/ INGOs NGOs/ INGOs (For NGOs/ INGOs Working with NDMA) •Indicate Sector of Intervention & Number of projects •Scrutiny of documents •Analysis/Comments on the proposal •NoC issued •MoU signed • Further coordination and facilitation with respect to implementation of the projects • To be issued by DDMA