The lapses in the Disaster Management Bill

The Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, has sparked concerns regarding its impact on participatory governance and accountability. Critics argue that the Bill fails to address key gaps in the Disaster Management Act (DMA), 2005, and weakens provisions meant to ensure a holistic, inclusive, and efficient disaster management system.

Lapses in the Bill’s Provisions

• Top-Down Approach in Terminology: The Bill uses terms like ‘monitor’ and ‘guidelines’, which may undermine local communities' role as ‘first responders’, as emphasized in global frameworks such as the Sendai Framework. A more collaborative approach using terms like ‘supervision’ would have fostered greater trust with local entities.
• Lack of Acknowledgment for Local Communities: While the Bill defines concepts like 'hazard' and 'resilience', it ignores the critical role of local communities, panchayats, and NGOs in disaster management, evident in past disasters like Cyclone Aila and the 2013 Kedarnath floods.
• Absence of Intersectional Vulnerability Considerations: The Bill neglects to address intersectional vulnerabilities, failing to recognize the compounded discrimination faced by women, disabled individuals, and marginalized communities during disasters, thus limiting the Bill's inclusivity.

Concerns Regarding Accountability and Governance

• Omission of Relief Standards: Sections 12, 13, and 19, which set minimum standards of relief for disaster victims and special provisions for vulnerable groups, are omitted in the Bill. This omission weakens accountability in disaster relief and hampers the holistic recovery process.
• Performance Evaluation Gaps: The Bill lacks provisions for evaluating district authorities' performance, potentially allowing for political exploitation of disaster recovery efforts and undermining accountability in disaster management operations.
• Absence of Animal Welfare Measures: The Bill overlooks the death of animals in disasters, neglecting the responsibilities of Disaster Management Authorities (DMAs) in implementing the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, and addressing the impact of disasters on wildlife.

Gaps in Regional and Urban Disaster Management

• Urban Disaster Management Authority (UDMA): The Bill proposes an Urban Disaster Management Authority (UDMA), but its need remains unclear. Municipal Corporations, which control urban land use, often contribute to urban flooding, and the Bill fails to address the role of these bodies in disaster management.
• Lack of Regional Collaboration: The Bill fails to mention regional collaboration frameworks like SAARC, BIMSTEC, or BRICS, missing an opportunity to strengthen cross-border disaster response strategies in South Asia, especially in light of increasing zoonotic and epizootic diseases.
• Limited International Cooperation: The Bill does not encourage international collaboration or decentralization of responsibilities within the National Disaster Management Authority. A regional approach, as outlined in the 2011 SAARC Agreement on Rapid Response, could have improved disaster resilience across neighboring countries.

Practice Question

Q. Critically analyze the provisions of the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, and discuss how its limitations may impact India’s disaster management framework. What are the implications for regional and international collaboration in disaster response?