– SAMJHANA Karki

The opinion piece originally appeared in the April 2023 Issue of New Business Age Magazine. Please read the original article here.

The probability of disasters occurring worldwide is increasing. The Annual Weather, Climate, and Catastrophe Insight Report 2023 revealed that natural catastrophes alone resulted in $313 billion in global economic losses. According to the Global Risks Report 2023, natural disasters and extreme weather events rank second in the top ten risks over the next two years. Whether caused by natural hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, hurricanes, and floods, or non-natural hazards such as industrial accidents, terrorist attacks, civil wars, and pandemics, disasters can have significant social, economic, and political consequences. The impacts of these events can have far-reaching and cascading effects on governance, power dynamics, and public policy.

The recent earthquake in Turkey and Syria has highlighted the impact of disasters on a country’s socio-economic status. According to the Global Rapid Post-Disaster Damage Estimation Report 2023 published by the World Bank, the two major earthquakes on February 6 caused direct physical damages estimated at $34.2 billion for Turkey, which accounts for four percent of the country’s 2021 GDP. Syria also experienced damages worth $5.1 billion.

South Asia has been experiencing a series of disasters that have had a significant impact on the region’s development. Unfortunately, poverty, inadequate infrastructure, and ineffective governance have worsened the consequences of these disasters. One major example of their devastating impact can be seen in Bangladesh, where around 7.2 million people were affected by flooding in June 2022. Similarly, Pakistan experienced historic floods the same year, resulting in damages and economic losses exceeding $30 billion.

Nepal is not immune to the consequences of disasters. It is among the 20 most multi-hazard-prone countries in the world. In 2015, the Gorkha earthquake and subsequent aftershocks caused the deaths of approximately 9,000 people and injured around 22,000. The disaster also resulted in loss and damage estimated at $7 billion, equivalent to one-third of Nepal’s GDP. Additionally, severe flooding in August 2017 affected 1.7 million people and caused loss and damage of $585 million, equivalent to three percent of Nepal’s GDP. Despite having a small population of 30 million, Nepal has faced significant impacts from disasters, resulting in high costs in terms of human life and economic damages.

Disasters have far-reaching consequences, affecting not only the physical environment but also the social and economic fabric of society. The loss of life, injuries, and displacement can cause significant trauma and mental health issues for individuals and communities. Disasters also disrupt businesses, leading to lost revenue and decreased productivity. This can result in reduced economic activity, job losses, and a decline in living standards. Additionally, disasters can have a significant impact on the country’s economy, leading to decreased agricultural output and slowed tourism activities.

The physical damage to infrastructure can also make it difficult for people to access essential services. For example, the floods and landslides of 2021 caused damage to physical infrastructure worth $9.9 million in Nepal, making it challenging for people to access critical services such as water supply and electricity. Furthermore, investment in disaster relief efforts, including search and rescue operations, emergency shelters, and reconstruction and rehabilitation, increases government spending. This can have implications for the country’s budget and development priorities.

Disasters can also worsen existing social inequalities, leading to unequal access to relief and rehabilitation measures. Individuals from so-called higher castes or with political affiliations may be more likely to receive humanitarian aid than the actual needy and affected population. This can lead to a breakdown in social order, and criminal activities may increase.

In addition, disasters disrupt the health sector, causing difficulties in accessing medical care, particularly for individuals with pre-existing health conditions. This leads to a significant impact on health outcomes, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality rates. Moreover, climate-induced disasters often force people to evacuate their homes and seek refuge in evacuation centres or camps. The overpopulation in these camps results in reduced access to safe water and sanitation facilities, increasing the risk of waterborne diseases. Therefore, the socio-economic impacts of disasters make people more vulnerable to future disasters.

Reducing Nepal’s vulnerability to disasters is a complex issue that requires a multi-faceted approach. The government has taken several steps to minimise the impact of disasters, including adopting the National Policy and Strategic Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (2018-2030), enacting the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act, establishing various Early Warning Systems, launching the BIPAD portal, creating the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority (NDRRMA), providing emergency response training to communities, and offering disaster response training. However, the implementation of these initiatives has been challenging due to insufficient coordination, resources, and capacity.

One of the ways forward to reduce the impact of disasters is increasing awareness among students. The Nepali curriculum and textbooks have not been fully disaster sensitive until now. Incorporating disaster risk reduction (DRR) education into the school curriculum is essential to building a more resilient society. DRR education enhances people’s awareness and knowledge about disasters and how to mitigate the hazards and consequences of such disasters. Schools can develop dedicated modules on DRR, Emergency Preparedness, and Crisis Management Plan (EPCMP). Games, simulations, and other activities (use of case studies and real-life disaster examples) can be done to illustrate concepts and principles related to DRR. This could help build our future generation to cope with the risks and impacts of disasters. Nepal can learn from Japan about incorporating DRR into the school curriculum.

Overall, reducing the impact of disasters requires a comprehensive approach that involves developing a disaster preparedness plan, conducting risk assessments, strengthening early warning systems, and establishing emergency response teams. Inclusive policies in DRR can help reduce the impact of disasters and promote inclusive and sustainable development. Collaboration between governments, the private sector, and educational and research institutes is crucial for disaster resilience. Additionally, prioritising community awareness is essential. Moreover, government and local representatives can play a crucial role in reducing disaster risk by promoting preparedness, coordinating responses, and advocating for policies and programs that support resilience.

– SAMJHANA Karki

The devastating earthquake on 25 April 2015, with a magnitude of 7.6 Richter Scale and hundreds of aftershocks, caused a significant impact on the lives of over eight million people across Nepal. The Post Disaster Needs Assessment, 2015, published by the National Planning Commission, reported more than 8,000 deaths and property damage worth approximately USD 7 billion.

Nepal ranks 11^th globally in terms of vulnerability to earthquakes. As soon as the news of the Nepal Earthquake broke, there was overwhelming commitment and subsequent support from the neighbouring countries, and India was the first to respond. It was reported that the then Nepali Prime Minister Sushil Koirala, who was in Bangkok, knew of the earthquake through the Indian Prime Minister’s tweet. India dispatched relief materials and rescue teams immediately.

The Indian government initiated Operation Maitri and launched a humanitarian mission, dispatched National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) teams and special aircraft with rescue and relief materials in Nepal. India released INR 96 crores (around 154 crore Nepali rupees) to Nepal for housing and school sector assistance. Under the post-earthquake reconstruction package, India allocated a grant of USD 250 million, including USD 50 million each for the education, cultural heritage, and health sector and USD 100 million for the housing sector.

When a crisis occurs, Nepal looks up to India. India, our closest neighbor, has always helped Nepal in the difficult hours. During this crisis, India provided immediate responses and timely decision-making. Furthermore, a swift emergency response was possible because of connected borders, friendly ties and institutional relations between the two nations. Close bilateral relations, including fraternal relations between the two countries’ militaries, provided the basis for swift support.

India experienced some hiccups during the support. Despite widespread help, Indian media faced a backlash for their insensitive reporting, which made the hashtag #GoHomeIndianMedia trend on Twitter. 

The India-imposed economic blockade towards the end of the year escalated the humanitarian crisis, though. Moreover, the blockade un-did the goodwill India had garnered from the support. It has left a long-lasting anti-India sentiment among the general populace. 

Disaster response is an additional dimension in Nepal-India relations. Other disasters such as floods affect both countries. They have established common mechanisms to deal with such issues, but their workings are unsatisfactory. It would benefit both countries to strengthen disaster cooperation, for it is less prone to conflict and garners goodwill for each other.

– JURIA SATO Bajracharya

Domestic efforts and existing bilateral treaties

Some notable initiatives are underway in Nepal. The Disaster Risk Reduction National Strategic Action Plan (2018-2030) proposes priority actions in the short-term (2018-2020), medium-term (2020-2025), and long-term (2025-2030), assigning responsibilities within federal, provincial, and local governments. In 2019, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority was also established to coordinate, facilitate, and implement disaster risk reduction and management-related functions. Additionally, the Government of Nepal has developed an integrated and comprehensive one-stop Disaster Information Management System known as the Building Information Platform Against Disaster (BIPAD) portal, which is currently being localized.

On the bilateral front, while there have been several broad engagements around river management between Nepal and India, these have been limited. The two countries have often resorted to blaming one another for their shortcomings. There are different mechanisms to deal with flooding [for e.g. the secretary-level Joint Commission on Water Resources (JCWR), the Water and Energy Commission Secretariat (WECS) that deals with trans-boundary water issues, and the Joint Committee on Inundation and Flood Management (JCIFM)]. Sadly, these engagements have remained relatively passive. For instance, flood forecasting, which includes the planning and implementation of the Flood Forecasting Master Plan, was discussed consecutively in the JCIFM between 2014-2017, but this was left off the agenda in the 12th JCIFM in 2018. Similarly, the JCWR meetings are to be held once in six months, yet only seven meetings have taken place since its establishment in 2000. Dynamic and iterative engagement is key to addressing this issue, but cooperation on both ends has stalled over the years.

At the regional level, the SAARC Disaster Management Centre (SDMC), a dedicated body for disaster risk management, was established to build the capacities of South Asian nations and implement the Comprehensive Framework on Disaster Management for South Asia. In its power, the SDMC has developed regional guidelines, built a collective emergency response mechanism, and conducted several technical training sessions. However, the volume of such initiatives has decelerated over the past years. Despite having elements of an effective structure in place, emergency responses at the SAARC level have not been deployed in the wake of the multiple calamities in the region. As such, it has not been able to sustain a robust disaster management framework in ways that would enable member countries to build their national capacities and respond through concerted coordination. 

Shifting approach beyond the blame game

India and Nepal have long accused each other of the trans-border floods. Amidst the pandemic in 2020, the state government of Bihar blamed Nepal for obstructing flood preparedness activities. Nepal, on its part, has raised growing concerns over how Indian infrastructure and development activities along the Koshi and Gandaki rivers and along the border have hindered the natural flow of water. Progress is also compounded by the issue’s complex geographical and political nature and discontent among vested interest groups. Highlighting India’s hegemonic status in past water treaties with Nepal, many scholars have argued that treaties like the Koshi agreement (1954) and the Gandak agreement (1959) have deprived Nepal of its fair share of benefits. Decades have passed since these agreements, and any further passive leadership might impede timely action for collective and coordinated flood risk management efforts.

As we mark the 75th year of Nepal-India bilateral ties, leveraging this moment to gear focus towards the protection of lives and livelihood of the hardest hit climate-vulnerable communities – particularly in Bihar and Terai region – is crucial. Such cooperation will help further the bilateral relations and directly impact the lives and livelihood of people on both sides of the border. Formal government-to-government cooperation mechanisms for flood risk management efforts have been in place for decades with limited focus. Civil society actors, non-government organizations, and the private sector could play an increasingly important role in shifting the current narratives of transboundary disaster management negotiations. In the region, initiatives such as the Bangladesh-India Sundarbans Region Cooperative Initiative (BISRCI) have been helping the two governments manage the Sundarbans sustainably since 2011. In Nepal, the Koshi Disaster Risk Reduction Knowledge Hub (KDKH) is working to foster transboundary collaboration on disaster risk reduction and strengthen science, policy, and interlinkages. It has convened dialogue annually since its inception in 2018, bringing together researchers and policymakers to explore ways of collaboration. These initiatives play an important role as enablers in fostering bilateral dialogues and should be leveraged in furthering regional cooperation.

With climate change exacerbating extreme flood events every year, cooperation in disaster risk management will be increasingly critical to better Nepal-India relations. Climate contexts in both India and Nepal are characterized by the uncertainty of monsoon rain patterns, risks of melting Himalayan glaciers, and vulnerable low-lying coastal cities. Furthermore, losses from climate change in GDP per capita for both Nepal and India are projected to be higher than the global average of ~7 percent, with Nepal facing a potential loss of 13 percent and India ten percent in 2100.

Flooding during the monsoon season is a natural phenomenon. Nepal’s Terai region of Nepal and Eastern India face growing hazards from glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) and bishyari floods, a type of flood that occurs due to the breaking of dams caused by landslides falling directly into rivers. Many rivers originate in the Himalayas and flow to the Bay of Bengal. Koshi, Gandaki, and Karnali rivers – the three largest river basins in Nepal – enter India through Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, the most populous states in India. Given the number of lakes at risk of bursting across these basins, the strong upstream-downstream flood linkages, the changing patterns of extreme precipitation events, and the cascading impacts on lives and livelihoods, cooperation in disaster risk reduction and management cannot be overlooked.

Vulnerability to flooding Despite increasing risks of devastating flood impacts annually, the momentum around cooperation tends to surface only during the monsoon season when more priority should ideally be directed towards rescue and rehabilitation. Nepal has already witnessed multiple damaging floods over the past decade – notably the Koshi flood of August 2008, one of the most disastrous floods affecting 3.5 million people across both countries. The tragedy exposed the inadequacy of current flood management systems and warned of the changing climate patterns. In recent years, Nepal has witnessed unseasonal heavy rains shortly after the monsoon in October 2021, a month that is crucial for agricultural harvests. The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development estimated a loss of NPR 8.26 billion worth of paddy crops across all seven provinces only due to the unseasonal rain and flooding. Recent flooding patterns and climate change in the region indicate flooding is no longer a seasonal concern.

This series of Nepal-India relations blog posts are published on the auspicious occasion of India’s 75th Independence Celebration.