Monday, 17 March 2014 00:00
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
In Sri Lanka, droughts are good for politics. But even as President Mahinda Rajapaksa issues orders for the latest wrath of the weather gods to be addressed, there is a fear that failing to implement competent disaster management processes will cost the country dear.
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) has stated that natural disasters in Sri Lanka during the past decade have inflicted an economic cost of over Rs. 257 billion or US$ 1.95 billion.
UNOCHA said that in the last 34 years, natural disasters have killed more than 37,000 Sri Lankans. As recently as November 2010, heavy monsoon rains triggered devastating floods in parts of the country, affecting close to 1.2 million people (319,451 families).
Thousands of families have lost their livelihoods. Some 30,000 houses were partially damaged or completely destroyed and 300,000 hectares of rice paddy was ruined. In an effort to mitigate effects of disasters, the Survey Department of Sri Lanka and the UNOCHA have signed a historic agreement for digital data dissemination. But natural as well as manmade disasters continue to plague the country. For example, the drought in 2012 reduced growth from the projected 7.2% to 6.7%. Estimates of the damages were not comprehensively released but it is likely they were in the millions or possibly billions and severely felt by all people. Losses of State-run Ceylon Electricity Board and Ceylon Petroleum Board (CPC) sky rocketed and matters were exacerbated due to the Norochcholai power plant breaking down. The result was power cuts and increased electricity prices.
Unfortunately, the Budget for 2014 made no structural changes to the CPC, CEB or Water Board to ensure that mismanagement, wastage and corruption is reduced to make the institutions more economically sound. Everyone got away with better balance sheets in 2013 because the rain gods were kind but it is looking more and more like 2014 could be a rerun of 2012 and little or no preparation has been made. Rampant corruption is also a problem. Weekend newspapers reported of 700 acres of forest in the north cleared illegally by a businessmen under a permit from the Road Development Authority (RDA), which they insist is fake. But it’s just a drop in the challenges of vast procurement of land for development projects irrespective of environmental damage.
Disaster management is similar to disaster mitigation; however it implies a whole-of-Government approach to using community resources to fight the effects of an event and assumes the community will be self-sufficient for periods of time until the situation can be stabilised. This is especially important as farmers will be the first and worst hit. Already 45,000 acres of paddy are reported to have been devoured by drought.
Through disaster management, one cannot completely counteract the damage but it is possible to minimise the risks through early warning, provide developmental plans for recuperation from the disaster, generate communication and medical resources, and aid in rehabilitation and post-disaster reconstruction.
The exchange of correct information during and following the event is important, in order to ensure the resources necessary to support response and recovery activities are made available.
Conservation of rainwater, a drought fund and providing farmers with new drought-resistant crop varieties are all activities that need prior planning. The fact that the drought takes place in a year that holds elections means that the disaster will be taken over by politics. Such predictions do not bode well for thousands of families who depend on agriculture for their main livelihood.
As the numbers show, the human and economic cost of disasters continues to pose challenges to Sri Lanka’s disaster management system. But it would seem that previous lessons have been for naught.
