As the flood waters recede in Chennai, India's fourth-largest metropolis slowly limps back to normalcy. The floods, which followed an unprecedented cloudburst, took at least 280 lives and caused colossal damage. While the relief efforts featured sensible coordination between local authorities and the army, genuine questions must now be asked about whether the institutional protection against such disasters in India is strong enough. As man-made global warming intensifies, it is likely that weird weather events will get more frequent. It is necessary that India's pattern of development - especially in sensitive areas like deltas and in the high mountains where landslides can occur - should respond to this change. However, it is far from certain if there is even capacity within the government to deal with the changing scenario.
The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), which was set up in 2005, has not distinguished itself in various disasters so far. In many ways, the first response to any disaster is run by the states, and the NDMA's most important role at the moment is to ensure that state disaster management agencies are equipped with know-how and expertise, and that they can coordinate with each other. However, there has been so far an understandable focus on efforts to mitigate the effects of natural disasters, and on relief after such events. It is clear from occurrences like these floods - and from the floods and landslides in Uttarakhand two years ago - that it is also important to have a constituency within the government coherently arguing for development plans that take into account the susceptibility of any region to disasters.
For example, many cities have over-built on flood plains. This was a factor in the Chennai rains and also in the Uttarakhand disaster; however, in the latter case, it has been reported that the same mistakes have been made again in the rebuilding process. Other warnings could and should be issued. For example, it has been observed worldwide that some crops, such as maize, cause the soil to lose its ability to retain water and thus help cause the run-offs that lead to floods. Trees along riverbanks are crucial, too: research shows that water sinks into the earth around trees 67 times more than into soil on which grass or weeds have been planted. Dredging of rivers can squeeze more water into the channel - but cannot prevent floods, which require the flood-plain intact.
These various lessons from experience elsewhere and in India need to be collated and acted upon. Various scenarios dealing with conceivable natural disasters should be scientifically outlined, and their impact in the case of various different development possibilities examined. One location in the government for such thinking could be the ministry of environment and forests, but its mandate is to protect the environment and not to discuss how natural disasters are created or their effects minimised. Ideally, the thinking on this subject should be conducted by the NDMA, and what is learned must be passed on to state authorities - and thence into the development planning process. Without an advocate for disaster prevention in the government, unregulated and unplanned building and development will continue to put lives, livelihoods and habitations at risk.
