Development, Governance, and Disaster Nexus: Bangladesh Viewpoint
Good governance is expected to make disaster risk reduction a policy priority, allocating the necessary resources, ensuring and enforcing implementation, assigning accountability for failures, and facilitating participation by all relevant stakeholders. Governance is defined as political commitment and strong institutions. Natural disasters jeopardize development gains, but development choices can exacerbate disaster risks. Adequate institutional, policy, and legal frameworks are required. Bangladesh is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world, with great negative consequences associated with various natural and human-induced hazards. Bangladesh has demonstrated its remarkable resilient capacities as a global champion in Disaster Management.
In an effort to professionalize Comprehensive Disaster Management Approach with particular focus on integration of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) into development process, Bangladesh developed a National Plan for Disaster Management (NPDM) as well as Disaster Management Act 2012 are outcome of the national and international commitments of the Government of Bangladesh and the Ministry of Food and Disaster Management and Relief (MoFDMR) for addressing the disaster risks comprehensively. Besides, the Standing Orders on Disaster (SOD) were revised a couple of times with the avowed objective of making the concerned persons understand and perform their duties and responsibilities regarding disaster management at all levels. Bangladesh deserves acclaim for making sufficient, appropriate legislative arrangements for disaster risk management, including the mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction into development planning.
Nevertheless, in recent years, various efforts have attempted to ‘leapfrog’ this obstacle by developing more forward-thinking plans of action and strategies, reflecting modern thinking around disaster risk management and, to some degree, embracing principles of mainstreaming. If fully implemented, these plans and strategies could represent considerable progress in mainstreaming at both national and local levels. The relevant ministries and local governments are legally responsible for implementing disaster management, as it is still commonly referred to in department circulars and executive orders, within their own areas of responsibility.
In practice, most of the local-level disaster management committees, particularly Union Disaster Management Committee (UDMC) risk reduction and mainstreaming capacity and capabilities, are often very limited. At the level of local government, various shortcomings in the basic planning process have posed considerable obstacles in effectively mainstreaming disaster risk reduction concerns into sub-national planning, most importantly relating to the fact that development and investment plans are not necessarily in place and, if they are, are not necessarily linked. Intra-government horizontal and vertical integration is not reflected in the overall planning process of the Government of Bangladesh.
Bangladesh should be proud of its people, who have demonstrated remarkable resilience in the face of natural disasters. They have learned to live with hazards and have devised their own coping strategies to deal with disaster shocks. In Bangladesh, what we perceived as familiar coping strategies are those that the community has adopted with conviction and experimentation over the eons. There is also a large amount of indigenous knowledge to reduce the impact of hazards. It is found from the various literature that local people are aware of the changing climate and frequency of disaster events, and they develop their own adaptation measures based on their cultural practices and past experiences. People in Bangladesh always find ways to live with the environment using the knowledge they have gained from their ancestors. This knowledge is usually in the form of social practices and behaviours. In many countries, this knowledge is manifested in the form of songs, folklore, and also proverbs, which usually become part of cultural beliefs and practices.
As a signatory to the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015, the Government of Bangladesh is striving hard to achieve goals stipulated in the HFA by shifting the paradigm from a relief-centric approach culture to a disaster risk reduction approach. Legislative changes have paved the way for moving towards a disaster risk reduction (DRR) culture, and therefore, political will and sufficient capacity are essential to making DRR an underlying principle in all relevant development sectors. In support of the implementation of the SAARC Comprehensive Framework on Disaster Management and Disaster Prevention, as a member state of SAARC, Bangladesh has made its efforts aligning the mandate with legislative approaches with a view to building the resilience of nations and communities to Disasters.
The political government, for the first time in the history of Bangladesh, mainstreamed the concept of DRR with the enactment of legislation and institutional rearrangements from the national level to the local level. Mainstream Disaster Risk Reduction, by way of diminishing the relief-centric approach in Disaster Management, is deceptive in Bangladesh. Donors are found to be visible when a disaster happens in Bangladesh. The Local Consultative Group includes representation of all key stakeholders and is the central forum for the Government and donor agencies to take strategic decisions and share ideas and information on disaster management.
The Disaster Management Act 2012 has been effective with a view to establishing an effective disaster management system in Bangladesh. Only the formulation of public policies for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction in the development process is not adequate. The concept of the paradigm shift is well understood amongst the disaster management community in Bangladesh, and its essence has been included in the policy discourse of the country. Coordination of disaster response was extremely challenging because the humanitarian agencies prepared their response plan individually, and the objectives of these plans were too diverse to be aligned with a common goal.
Apparently, DRR and development should move simultaneously in efforts to promote the culture of disaster risk reduction, avoiding a relief-centric disaster management approach in Bangladesh. Clear leadership and a common vision of DRR as developmental and distinct from disaster management have the essence to put DRR into the domain of development. DRR is perceived as everyone's business, and all stakeholders, both state and non-state, must adopt DRR into their respective development plans to mainstream for reducing disaster risk and enabling vulnerable people to manage their lives and livelihoods with security and less risk. The donor community—financial institutions, international agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and donor governments—is recognizing the need to place more emphasis on programs that prevent disaster losses but could not contribute to the direct funding facility of the government for a coordinated disaster risk reduction programme by avoiding duplication of efforts. Donor communities join hands with local NGOs for the execution of their respective programme.
Department of Disaster Management (DDM) is responsible for coordinating and making “disaster risk reduction and response activities of all governmental and non-governmental agencies object-oriented and robust”. In reality, agencies that participate in humanitarian response generally lack a shared understanding of the problem. They prepare response plans individually, and often their goals and strategies are so diverse that they rarely agree on a common objective. Also, in many cases, funding arrangements allow very little flexibility in the individual agencies’ plans. As a result, coordination of humanitarian responses becomes hugely challenging. Emergencies, like floods and cyclones, necessitate moving people to safe places. However, the at-risk areas did not have sufficient numbers of flood or cyclone shelters; also, the existing shelters were too small to accommodate all the people who needed them.
The gap between policy and practice continues to stymie disaster management, and disaster-affected people's voices and capacities in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery have been insufficient. Bangladesh is regarded as a global leader in disaster management; however, there is a lack of evidence due to the lack of an overall monitoring system and weak monitoring and evaluation practices. The willingness and political commitment of various agencies, including the government and major donors, is the first and foremost major challenge to disaster risk reduction action, which is exacerbated by the resources available for the same.
There must be a thorough examination of how much of the government budget is spent on DRR activities. We also need to look at how many donors are funding DRR programs and what percentage of their total budget is allocated to DRR interventions. It has been observed that the poorest countries are also the most vulnerable to natural disasters. The ability of the nation as a whole to bounce back is even further limited. Even if there is commitment from the Government, there is no resource to fulfill the commitment.
Disaster Risk Reduction is incorporated in a number of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Goals 11, 13, and 14). One of the SDGs is to build a resilient and sustainable city. It requires not only ensuring the basic needs of the city dwellers, but also long-term planning to reduce the burden in cities through decentralisation of basic services, as well as the reduction of incidents of disasters. According to the Hyogo Framework progress report of Bangladesh, some of the loopholes in this regard are: The lack of land zoning and regulation of private real estate development, a contingency plan to best utilise the resources, risk assessment, collection and dissemination of data.
Accountability, whether downward, upward, or horizontal, is insufficient in Bangladesh. The Government of Bangladesh has taken a number of significant steps during the last few years to build up institutional arrangements from national to Union Parishad (UP) levels for effective and systematic disaster management, facilitating relief to the suffering of disaster victims. To maintain proper coordination amongst the concerned Ministries, departments, line agencies, Local Government Body, and community people, and also to ensure their proper functioning to mitigate sufferings of the people, the Government of Bangladesh has formulated a set of top-down mechanisms from national to the grassroots levels.
For instance, UDMC has been given the mandate to act as the rural disaster management entity, and it is supposed to play a role in disaster preparedness, mitigation, emergency response, and post-disaster rehabilitation. The UDMC must ensure that local people are kept informed and capable of taking practical measures for the reduction of risk at household and community levels, and also disseminate the success stories of reducing disaster risks widely among the local people. They hold a hazard, vulnerability, and risk analysis at the Union level and prepare a risk reduction action plan (RRAP) and contingency plan for earthquake and other hazards. The UDMC facilitates coordination among the development agencies and service providers through quarterly coordination meetings and makes decisions about the implementation of action plans for risk reduction, as well as reviewing the progress of the risk reduction action plan. It also works to raise funds at a local level to implement the risk reduction action plan.
Unfortunately, people in rural localities, particularly vulnerable groups, have very limited access to UDMC’s meeting deliberations and decision-making processes. This also suggests that the local vulnerable group members have very limited information about the role, mandates, and functioning of the disaster management committee at the ground level. There was no evidence of any role being played by UDMC in a pre-disaster period. The general perception from the community level consultation revealed that disaster risk management is still a secondary priority and not well integrated into different programmes being implemented by the Union Parishad.
Persons who manage and lead Disaster Management Committees are not experts in Disaster management, but the SOD gave them the authority to coordinate and manage disaster management efforts. Political leadership at the local level is not involved in leading the disaster management and therefore, people’s interests and sense of accountability are not reflected. People who are exposed to greater disaster vulnerability are often deprived and are unable to access vital knowledge regarding what sort of disaster management programmes are planned and executed by the Upazila and District administrations in Bangladesh. On the other hand, the Union Disaster Management Committee, headed by the Union Chairman, has been in place as the chairman, and other members are not well-trained about the procedure of running the committee.
The community participation in UDMC activities builds confidence, pride, and capabilities to pursue disaster preparedness and mitigation as well as development responsibilities at the local level. Capacity building and public awareness activities through UDMC enable the communities to increase participation and eventually, to sustain even on their own the preparedness and mitigation activities. Concerned government departments, including the Department of Disaster Management, NGOs/INGOs, and the policy of including two women in each UDMC, do not go far enough to ensure that the needs and capacities of women are represented. There is no evidence or analysis available on whether women are able to participate and influence the UDMCs.
An effort should be made to consider the legitimacy of initiating coordination by mapping out how to trigger a coordinated approach to an event, empowering Union Parishad, the first responder in a disaster. The international humanitarian community must also ensure its efforts continue with more community-focused interventions that relate directly to preparedness for coordinated response. However, there is growing momentum and efforts to address this situation coming from the UN system, the INGOs, and the donor community. An alignment of these efforts is also needed. There is a need to work with the government on establishing good quality information on “disaster events” in order to establish their scope quickly, and any gaps in the government’s capacity to respond. This should include strong advocacy on the importance of sharing information promptly (regardless of the need for assistance) and on the provision of a forum where information generated by non-government actors can be shared broadly.
Mohammad Tarikul Islam, Visiting Scientist, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, and Visiting Professor at Oxford, Cambridge, and Harvard.