Addressing the Emergent Disaster Riskscape in Urban India

Recent natural disasters in India highlight the extent to which urban systems, associated structures, and populations are at greater risk. Cyclone Hudhud and the floods in Srinagar are clear indications of an emergent disaster riskscape that is taking shape in urban India. This article highlights the opportunities across five interlinked domains of institutions, innovation, investment, infrastructure and information to address this situation.

Disasters derail development processes. Communities and economies very often find it difficult to cope with and recover from such sudden shocks. And this is ever more intense and prolonged in an urban context where drivers of disaster vulnerability as well capacities to adapt are diverse and differential. While hydro-meteorological hazards, such as cyclones, storms, and extreme rainfall events, are likely to become more frequent and intense because of a changing climate, there has also been a significant increase in the level of exposure of our urban soci0ecological systems. The growing body of scientific evidence, such as the Working Group II contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2014), not only points to a changing pattern of such hydro-meteorological hazards but also highlights the multiple ways through which development choices and planning have increased exposure and given rise to a new risk regime in our cities and societies.
Disaster risk in urban settings is quite distinct and is influenced by the processes of urbanisation and other underlying socio-economic and political factors. Disaster-induced loss and damage in such situations are significantly high. The total economic loss in the Jammu and Kashmir floods has been estimated to the tune of Rs 1.0 trillion ($16 billion) and insurance payouts of more than Rs 9.0 billion ($150 million) (Aon 2014). These estimates pertain to loss and damages that have been quantified and monetised and do not include the non-economic loss and damage such as erosion of culture, threat to identity, disruptions of social cohesion, decline in ecosystem services and trauma associated with displacement.
While urbanisation offers tremendous economic opportunities and drives a nation’s growth, natural disasters and climate extremes have an impact on these processes and threaten these development gains in multiple ways. A vulnerability analysis of India’s 20 cities revealed that many of them are prone to multiple hazards (Parikh, Jindal and Sandal 2013). Urban development investments and other new initiatives need to be better informed about these risks. Disaster risks are complex and dynamic. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) efforts in our cities need to understand these challenges, as well as the opportunities. There is also an opportunity to move away from a sectoral approach to DRR towards an iterative process of learning and doing things at various levels.
Post-disaster discussions often focus on the city development plans (CDPs) and city disaster management plans (CDMPs), wherever available, and point to the critical issue of inadequate implementation of safety measures such as building codes or protection of natural waterbodies or drainage channels. But subsequent priorities of reconstruction and recovery dominate the discussions where scopes to relook at these plans to avoid future risk creation and accumulation are very limited.
India’s disaster relief expenses have gone from $1.1 billion in 2009 to more than $1.4 billion in 2013 and DRR investments over these periods went up from $0.5 billion to $0.6 billion (Development Initiative 2014).
Window of Opportunities
Recent natural disasters and the extent of loss and damage in our cities needs to be understood in the present context where the new government plans to build 100 smart cities across India. These cities will be built on the four pillars of social, physical, institutional and economic infrastructures. Sustainability and quality of life are central to this design (MoUD 2014a). Smart governance, by breaking down departmental silos through greater coordination and effective use of information and communication technology (ICT) tools, is at the heart of the proposed institutional infrastructure. Although disaster (on page 32) is placed within physical infrastructure, its linkages to other infrastructures have been well established in this design plan. Similarly the Ministry of Urban Development’s (MoUD) urban and regional development plans formulation and implementation guidelines (2014) underscore the need for city-level disaster management plans and other disaster proofing initiatives (MoUD 2014b).
This dual opportunity of a series of new initiatives of the government in India and the ongoing post-disaster reconstruction provides a window of opportunities to further strengthen our capacities to address the emergent disaster riskscape in a more efficient, inclusive and effective manner. It is against this background, we suggest five interlinked elements of institutions, investments, innovation, information and infrastructure as key to the design and development of an improved urban disaster risk governance framework.
(a) Institutions: Institutions play a critical role in shaping actions and decisions at various levels of governance. Various urban development policies, legislations, schemes and missions of the Government of India provide the larger institutional architecture to govern and manage our cities. While these overarching policy provisions look into a wide spectrum of issues, from urban renewal to local self-government, a space for further institutional renewal and reconfiguration has emerged because of changing economic priorities, emerging development needs and shifting environmental changes. This space is around rethinking and learning about the new trajectories of urban development which is inclusive, low-carbon and resilient. Opportunities to relook at the institutional practices, including decision-making, which could be reworked to reduce the level of exposure of the development investments and gains in the city are immense. It is also about strengthening the capacities of communities, mostly the urban poor, and the governance systems to better anticipate, prepare for and recover from such disasters.
Disaster management is a state subject and this is an opportunity to further strengthen the state disaster management authorities (SDMAs) and the district disaster management authorities (DDMAs) as enshrined in the Disaster Management Act (2005). Enhancing the capacity of these authorities and the associated systems for better disaster preparedness and risk reduction planning is essential as they play a critical role at the local level. There is a growing body of evidence on the effectiveness of investments in and support for institutions and actors at the sub-national and city levels (Anton et al 2014). Because of their proximity to the challenges faced by the city and its citizens, these institutions and actors are well-positioned to design and develop context-specific measures and mobilise adequate resources, both financial and human. The recently released zero draft of the post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction has identified “the leadership and empowerment of local authorities and communities” as one of the key guiding principles. The Government of India’s decision to revamp and restructure the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is one such timely initiative (Yadav 2014), which could encourage further decentralisation of decision-making and resources to the state, municipality and district levels. Increased engagement of and contribution from non-traditional partners at the city level such as donors, trans-national corporations, scientific and research institutes and citizen groups could also be mobilised at the local level.
Disaster affects all sectors; from power supply to water and sanitation to health infrastructure. DRR planning provides an additional opportunity to multi-sectoral and interdepartmental coordination, monitoring and learning. A case in point is the Ahmedabad Heat Action Plan (2014), prepared under the leadership of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC), for reducing heat-related risks at the city and ward levels.
(b) Innovation: Technology plays a big role in supporting every other aspect of city disaster management plan and all spheres of decision-making associated with it. Simple and innovative technologies such as mobile apps and ICT-enabled platforms for early warnings build the capacities of authorities and citizens for better disaster preparedness. Such innovation could also be at the level of infrastructure design, construction, operation and maintenance in a city. Power infrastructures are most at risk where cyclones and floods are concerned and as witnessed in Hudhud and Phailin. According to preliminary estimates Andhra Pradesh’s energy department sustained a massive loss of more than Rs 1,000 crore in Hudhud (TNN 2014). An innovative and smart power distribution network through underground cabling is on the anvil.1 State governments and municipal authorities can further support and mobilise an innovation ecosystem by providing innovators and entrepreneurs adequate institutional support and space for city-specific innovative risk assessment and communication platforms. Microsoft’s City Next platform is one such innovation which provides real-time information to a diverse set of stakeholders through cloud computing and mobile technology. Microsoft India has already identified more than 40 solution areas across eight city domains and has started its work on the country’s first smart “IT” city in Surat.
(c) Investment: Investments in protective infrastructures, risk transfer instruments such as insurance and other social protection measures protect lives, livelihoods and vital economic sectors. Financial resources very often play a critical role in ensuring the up scaling and sustainability of best practices. Planning Commission estimated an infrastructure investment of Rs 41 lakh crore during the Twelfth Plan and this offers a “trillion dollar opportunity” (Deloitte 2014). But realising this opportunity requires significant improvements in the existing investment environment. India has gone down by two points, from 23 in 2012 to 25 in 2014 in the Global Infrastructure Investment Index (ARCADIS 2014). Government’s efforts in bringing about a change through affirmative policy measures and initiatives such as the “Make in India” programme, which allows 100% foreign direct investment (FDI) through the automatic route for townships and cities, are likely to attract more global investments and technological know-how. Micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), which also employ a large chunk of the urban population, are at greater risk. Most of them do not have timely access to resources and technological know-how to reduce the level of exposure in their production systems and value chains. One such example is the age-old handloom and handicraft sector, one of the prime economic sectors in Jammu and Kashmir, which was severely affected in the recent floods.
Investments to build the resilience of such MSMEs will help to reduce the impact of disaster and protect the source of livelihoods for the large section of urban population dependent on them. Risk transfer instruments such as insurance and catastrophic bonds have emerged as innovative market-linked mechanisms to enhance the capacities of communities, businesses and states to quickly recover during disasters. According to AIR, a global leader in risk modelling, insured losses in cyclone Hudhud could be between $100 million to $400 million (AIR 2014). Taking into account these losses, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDA) is working towards a catastrophic insurance mechanism, including micro-insurance for the urban poor, in the country (ENS 2014). City-level opportunities have also been discussed in detail in the New Climate Economy Report (The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate 2014). Thus, investment and innovation opportunities to build resilient cities are many and emerging.
(d) Infrastructure: The state of infrastructure determines the scale of the impact of the disaster and how effectively vital infrastructures will bounce back and resume their services in an emergency. Poor and short-term infrastructure planning which are not risk-informed often exacerbate the vulnerability of a system and increase the level of exposure and multiplies disaster losses. Floodings in Kedarnath and Kashmir and cyclones in Odisha and Andhra Pradesh have highlighted how vulnerable some of the vital life-saving infrastructures such as roads, telecommunication, health, and electricity distribution are. Post-disaster recovery also helps us to understand and rectify some of the weaknesses in these infrastructure systems and to work towards improving others such as forecast and warning systems and decision-support systems. International cooperation, through technology transfer and financial investments, plays a significant role in many such infrastructure development. Japan, one of the world leaders in research and development (R&D) in disaster resilient infrastructure development and the third largest source of FDI for India, has come forward to build the capital city of the Hudhud affected state of Andhra Pradesh (NDTV 2014). While investments in physical infrastructures such as road networks, electricity, telecommunication, water supply, waste management and healthcare are essential, there is also ample scope for rebuilding the eco-infrastructure such as the green spaces, natural drainage systems, waterbodies and wetlands, most of which often gets obliterated and encroached. While these are context specific, economic returns from investments in a combination of eco-infrastructures and physical engineering structures such as embankments and dykes are significantly higher. A $36.3 million investment in dredging and restoration combined with construction of levees on the Barataria Basin Landbridge in Louisiana in 2010 has lowered the risk of flood damage by $5.3 billion to $18 billion annually (CPRA 2012).
(e) Information: Availability of, accessibility to, and use of real-time information is key to decision-making. The information needs of stakeholders and agencies are diverse. And this is all the more critical given the variabilities and uncertainties, including weather extremes that pose a significant challenge to decision-making in a relatively short span of time. Decision-makers at the local level require a relatively greater degree of precision in terms of forecasts and prediction. Second, updated information on trends in demography, development investments, state of the infrastructures, and changing patterns of livelihoods and resource use is essential to undertake timely and effective disaster preparedness and risk reduction measures. While science can play a big role in this through climate modelling and projections, the role of social sciences is even more important to highlight how perceptions, culture, gender and other socio-economic and political factors influence risk in a community or system at a given point in time. The persistent dichotomy of information producers versus information users does more harm than good. And we have witnessed the devastating effects of such dichotomy which results in divergent views, difference of opinions, confusion and chaos. Academic institutes, research bodies, private sector, municipal corporation, community-based organisations and other development agencies can work together to develop and update disaster risk information database. This would also enhance ownership of the process as well as the final products such as the CDMPs.
Disasters offer window of opportunities for course correction and improved planning. We hope this opportunity is not missed and we are able to plan our cities better in light of the emergent disaster riskscape in India.