PGDDM Project
PGDDM Project
PGDDM Project
Maidan Garhi,
[0]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1-13
5 BIBLIOGRAPHY 50-52
[1]
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
[2]
INTRODUCTION
Of all the physical, geological and natural phenomena that affect the earth, floods are the most
widespread. There is no place in the world which has never experienced a single event of flooding. Floods
are so intertwined with human history that myths about floods abound in all civilisations. An examination
of the mythologies shows these to express and be grounded in definite psychosocial contexts and
predicaments. They are an important evidence of the way knowledge is a social construct. Myths reflect
the views and problems of particular classes or activities. Mythologies are generally grounded in a cosmic
or Genesis type of myth that supposedly gives the others overall coherence (Hewitt 1983:24). Such myths
serve a dual purpose: they enable people to make meanings of things and happenings around them and
help them in dealing with less understood processes. Different religious scriptures around the world
abound with myths about floods. Possibly the most famous of these is that of Noah's Ark as mentioned in
the Bible. In this myth a great flood is marked as the beginning of civilisation. Almost all religions and
regions have their own version of a Noah around an event of flood which marks a changing point in the
history of their civilisations. The existence of myths around floods is proof enough that throughout human
history floods have occurred and been adapted to. Universally, flood myths repeat the common themes of
arks, mountains and godly retribution. They are often couched in terms of a new beginning rather than of
the end of the world. These myths may have diffused from a relatively small number of source areas. In
the light of being an omnipresent hydrological reality and the theme of mythologies across cultural
boundaries, floods can be established as a ubiquitous reality. Floods are a fact of natural and human
reality.
Ubiquitous as they are, floods can however be classified depending on their occurrence. In some regions
of the world characterised by heavy, albeit seasonal rainfall (like the monsoons in the Indian
subcontinent), cyclone-prone coastal areas, or in major river valleys, floods are a regular feature. Floods in
this case, then, are perennial in nature. This perennial nature ensures some sort of predictability to the
event. People living in such areas are equipped with a degree of preparedness such that they are not caught
unawares. However, floods in such areas and others can also be episodic. Unexpected torrential rain
caused by a cloudburst as witnessed in Uttarakhand in June 2013 or Ladakh in August 2010; a dam
burst resulting in flooding in catchment areas, a change in the course of a river, a breach in an
embankment or just incessant and excessive rainfall are examples of episodic events that cause havoc in
both usual rain fed areas and areas not used to frequent rainfall. Since such events are not predictable or
expected, the only intervention can be that of post factor crisis management.
[3]
Based on the occurrence of floods, consequences can vary for perennial and episodic floods. The
consequences of floods can range from expected and therefore normal, to floods being unexpected either
in the nature of their intensity or that of their duration and hence, disastrous and pathological. Emile
Durkheim’s essay 'Normal and Pathological' in his classic 'The Rules of Sociological Method' (1895),
discusses normal and pathological in the context of crime. According to him, crime is a normal social
phenomenon. Defying the paradox of concluding crime as normal if within certain prescribed levels, he
maintains that it is impossible to find any society which is devoid of crime. The notion of normal and
pathological can be analogous in the case of floods4. In case of perennial floods, inhabitants of flood
prone areas are familiar with floods and treat them as normal and expected occurrences adapting their
lives to accommodate these around the seasonal floods. Symbiotic relationships are developed as myths
about floods demonstrate. People develop adaptive mechanisms to live with floods. Normal floods, which
are regular and expected, bring benefits to most riverine communities since they tend to be not only
gradual and predictable but also bring with them rich mineral deposit (Chaturvedi and Saroch n.d.). The
local economy and ecology are usually well adapted to the normal 'flood pulse', which may be defined as
the slow seasonal rise and fall of the river hydrograph which is a feature of many hydro climatic regimes.
Cropping systems and management practices are adapted to the local flood regimes (Fazlul & Wodeyar,
2001). However, when floods are unexpected, the consequences can be devastating and people taken by
surprise. No amount of preparedness can assist in tackling the life-threatening situation at hand. It is then
that floods become pathological and hence, disastrous.
The approach of living with floods is well researched in Bangladesh. It has been realised that agriculture
is not only merely well-adjusted to 'normal' levels of flooding, but dependent upon it. Farmers plant
several varieties of rice at different times of the year, on different elevations of land, in a process of
continual adjustment to the variable water level, but the major crop, Aman rice or bau dhan in Assam,
grows during the flooding season and needs a certain level of water in order to survive. Processing of jute,
the main export crop of Bangladesh, also requires the large quantities of water brought by floods. This
duality of the flood as resource and hazard is reflected in language. Whereas the English term 'flood'
implies abnormality, in Bengali distinctions are made between 'normal' and 'abnormal' floods. The term
borsha refers to the wet season as well as the rain and the annual inundation which characterise it,
associating 'normal' floods with regularity and seasonal cycles. This is contrasted with an 'abnormal flood,'
bonna, which people define in terms of their own capacity to adapt to it. This holds true for Assamese as
well. The Assamese words of barixa refers to the monsoons as well the inundation associated with it. The
word baan is used by people to refer to the abnormal floods. Houses are built on plinths (bhiti), platforms
of raised earth, and may also contain a 'false roof' (kar), an area under the roof in which goods can be
[4]
stored and people themselves can live if necessary. If water enters the house the household cooks, eats,
sleeps and stores food on the bed, raising it higher if necessary by putting bricks under the legs. Other
goods are stored on high shelves or hung from the roof in jute nets, and livestock are protected by wooden
platforms (machan) built for them, or by being taken to a nearby road built on an embankment, if there is
one. The annual normal flood between June and October, associated with the monsoons makes the land
fertile by providing moisture and fresh silt to the soil. Thousands of species of fish also spawn during this
time of year. Peasant life thus is keyed to this predictable normal, annual event that benefits their crop
cycle and virtually rejuvenates their lives. The destructive impact of the flood is usually limited by the
adjustment that peasants who inhabit the flood plain regions have historically made. They adapt their
agricultural practices, cropping patterns and settlements the annual deluge. But the higher abnormal floods
(baan), associated with widespread damage to standing crops, properties, and loss of human life are
viewed as a calamity or disaster. Traditional wisdom suggests that such disasters occur only about once
every ten years (Zaman, 1993:986). This goes on to prove that there is a normality and abnormality
associated with floods.
Hence, floods can be both normal and pathological if understood within the context of the
ubiquitous nature of this hydrological phenomenon. The official understanding and discourse on floods is
often polarised. Governments and policy makers often adopt a lens to look at floods as unexpected, and
almost always destructive. Their emphasis is primarily the on the macro level which involves technical
solutions to control floods. This is demonstrated by policies on flood control which often aim at
controlling rivers, through measures such as construction of embankments and dams. In official data,
floods are portrayed more as a pathological than a normal phenomenon.
The Brahmaputra drains an area of 5,80,000 sq km until its confluence with the Ganga in Bangladesh. The
width of the valley is 80-90 km and the bed width of the river is 1.6 km to 16km. Rainfall averages 230
cm annually with a normal variation of 15%-20%. The Himalayan areas receive an average of 500 cm of
rainfall annually. The monsoons begin in April and rainfall between June and September account for 60%-
70% of the annual rainfall. During April to May the basin absorbs sufficient quantity of water. As a result,
the water holding capacity of the basin is already lost before the beginning of the monsoons. The
Brahmaputra valley being very narrow, the run off of the thirty-three tributaries that join 640km stretch of
the river in Assam adds to the spate (issue of floods). These tributaries flow into the main stream of the
river within a very short span of time. This short span enhances the peak load and aggravates the flood
situation (Kar: 2012, 11).
[5]
A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF FLOODS
The river Brahmaputra and its tributaries (many of which are much larger than some major Indian rivers)
have always overflowed their banks. People have lived in the Brahmaputra valley and experienced the
annual floods for long. The first written record of floods dates back to 1570 when the floods throughout
Assam were so severe that almost all the crops were damaged causing something like a famine. In 1642
also there was a heavy flood. According to records, embankments did exist and were in use even in those
days. Bank erosion and sediment transportation has been mentioned in a copper plate of Indrapal in
1058 A.D (Kar: 2012, 13). Embankments were constructed along the Dikhou, Disang, Jhanji, Disai,
Kakodonga and the Dhansiri, (on the south bank of the Brahmaputra) by the Ahom rulers even as far back
as in 1840 but were subsequently neglected. In undivided Lakhimpur district (which includes the present
day Dhemaji district), the Brahmaputra and its tributaries have changed their course over the years. The
Brahmaputra along with the Dihang, the Dihing and the Subansiri formed sandbanks. While floods in the
south bank (Dibrugarh) did little damage, the Sissi, the Gai, the Gantang, the Subansiri, the Ranganadi and
the Dikrong used to inundate vast areas on the north bank. When the British colonised Assam they
constructed new embankments and repaired the older ones. In 1852, an amount of 1080 INR was spent to
construct and maintain embankments. The embankments were along the Ranganadi, the Dikrong and their
tributaries (Gait, Kar, 2012:8- 9). Hence, floods and embankments were present before the British
annexed Assam. The network of embankments was obviously nowhere near what it is today. The floods
in those times were also different from the floods of today. The present day nature of floods can be
attributed to the massive earthquake that struck Assam on 15th August 1950. The next section discusses
the impact of this event on the floods in the Brahmaputra.
The 1950 earthquake caused widespread devastation throughout eastern Assam in the Mishimi and Abor
Hills of present day Arunachal Pradesh and parts of undivided Lakhimpur and Sibasagar districts.
Landslides occurred on a very large scale on the hill slopes of the Dihang, Dibang and Subansiri valleys
extending upto 100 km into the hills. As a result of these landslides, many tributaries of the Brahmaputra
were blocked and remained so for several days. Eventually the rivers broke through these blockages
causing sudden floods which brought down huge quantities of debris. Extensive siltation of the
riverbeds resulted in the shifting of the river courses. The Brahmaputra silted up to 2.5 to 3 metres at
Dibrugarh and the tributaries such as Dibang, Deopani, Jiapani and Ghurmara were all extensively silted
up at some places up to six metres. The changes in the direction of the rivers have been on such a scale
[6]
that the entire topography has undergone a permanent change. Even the Dihang and its tributaries
experienced changes on a lesser scale. Between the Dihang and the Subansiri, all the rivers were silted
and their mouths blocked inundating the countryside again (Goswami 1994, Dutta 1998, Goswami and
Das 2002, Kar: 2012, 10). Ranganadi, Kakoi, Dirga, Dikrong, Zaginadi, Singera were silted to various
degrees and developed new courses flooding their surroundings in consequence. No silt study was made
either before or after the earthquakes in the Brahmaputra or any of its tributaries but two sets of
observations were made at Dibrugarh. For the Brahmaputra river basin the topographical features and the
meteorological situations were enough to create floods even in normal conditions. Large scale seismic
disturbances from time to time upsetting the rivers of the entire region kept the drainage system in a
perpetual state of flux. The 1950 earthquake destabilised the drainage system thereby increasing the
degree of erosion. The group that was constituted by the Government of India in October 1964 to study
the flood problems of Assam reported that shoals made of sand upto a depth of 6.5 metres were formed in
the Brahmaputra from Saikhowaghat to Dhubri. These shoals are susceptible to erosion even in low
velocity and hence disappear and appear in different flood waves (Kar: 2012, 11-12). The same study also
showed that erosion has occurred over a length of 230 km on the north bank (Kar: 1994).
The 1954 resolution to eradicate floods did not take into cognizance the fallout of the great earthquake of
1950. In a way this was the beginning of the exclusion of people's knowledge. The local communities
sensed that the river had changed. It was shallower and the flooding patterns were not predictable. As
acute deforestation began upstream, the river carried much more foreign matter with it. The river started
to erode its banks and take away large chunks of cultivable land with it. As Monirul Hussain (2008) puts
it, because of continuous environmental degradation, flood and riverbank erosion in the plains and
landslides on the hills became endemic. This caused innumerable deaths, destruction and population
displacement. The intensity of floods, riverbank erosion and landslides increased substantially over the
years in terms of area and victims (ibid.). The people saw and experienced the changes but could do little
in the face of a government which did not provide either the space or the platform to include people's
knowledge or their experience in the changing face of the Brahmaputra and its floods.
From a natural phenomena to a manmade disaster riverine flood and erosion Failure to take into
cognizance the indigenous knowledge cost the communities dearly. Citing a poignant example, Subir
Bhaumik links environment degradation to the larger issue of development or the lack of it in the region.
In eastern Assam’s Rohmaria area, villagers were so upset with the government’s failure to tackle river
erosion that they stopped Oil India Limited (OIL) from commercial exploitation of the rich oil deposits in
the area. Thirty eight villages had been destroyed by the Brahmaputra in the past two decades but the
[7]
Assam government remained unmoved. The irony of the situation was further accentuated by the fact that
the then state’s Water Resources Minister Prithvi Manjhi was elected from the assembly constituency
where Rohmarilocated. The villagers did not have anything against OIL but they stopped their oil
production in 1999 only to force the government to do something about erosion. Pathetically, even the
‘economic blockade’ of the OIL facilities for ten years did not yield the desired result (Bhaumik, 2009).
Communities in Rohmaria remain impoverished by the erosion even now.
Riverbank erosion is a phenomenon which has increased in magnitude after 1950 when the river became
shallow. Erosion induced internally displaced peasants could not go back to and cultivate their land
because their land became a part of the river’s newly extended bed. It is not only the mighty Brahmaputra
but also the innumerable small and medium sized rivers that cause erosion in the Brahmaputra and the
Barak valleys (Hussain, 2008). This tragic scenario has not met with proper scientific, assessment
and adequate relief and rehabilitation measures. The state's responses rarely go beyond dragging its feet, a
few aerial visits and promises of compensation. Relief provided remains far from adequate. The brunt of
practicing exclusionary and symptomatic policy making is, almost always, borne by the most vulnerable
section of the population. The flood of 2004 alone affected more than 10 million people in the Assam
Valley. Most of them were ordinary peasants.While there were some suggestions from the Central
government agencies to deal with floods, action on erosion remains elusive. The inability of the state to
listen to people makes its strategy a unilinear one of flood control. The truth remains that it is not only the
floods that have pushed the people of Assam into an uncertain future; but riverbank erosion has also
affected millions. Over the years, environmental insecurity has increased substantially (ibid.). Floods in
the Brahmaputra and Barak Valleys of Assam cause “serious erosion, loss of life and livestock and heavy
damage to infrastructure and property retarding agricultural productivity on account of risk avoidance and
sandcasting, disrupting communications and education and posing health hazards... The flood damage to
crops, cattle, houses and utilities in Assam alone between 1953 and 1995 is estimated at Rs. 4400 crores
with a peak of Rs 664 crores in a single bad year (Shukla 1997).
The assessed flood prone area in Assam alone is estimated at 31.5 million hectares or 92.6 percent of the
cultivated land. In 1992-93 almost half of the land (1.63 million hectares) did not have any flood
management structures. Even the limited flood- management structures that do exist are poorly
maintained. The master plan prepared by the Brahmaputra Board involves Rs 1,848 crores at 1995 prices
for short term measures and Rs. 50,000 crores for long term measures up to 2050. In the meantime, the
state governments continue with firefighting operations and provide flood and natural calamity relief
causing a heavy drain on their otherwise meagre resources. The floods have created so much uncertainty
[8]
that there has been very little investment aimed at commercialising agriculture and fisheries (Bhaumik,
2009). People are often left to make decisions with meagre resources. The choice of which crops to plant,
whether to rebuild houses or send children to school all depend on the floods and erosion of the
subsequent year.
Failure to include people in decision making has resulted in faulty policies, led to poor human
development, deprivation and eventually displacement. Multiple deprivations led to marginalisation many
times over. Multiple displacements due to a variety of reasons and multiple displacements due to the same
cause are common in the north east. Internal displacements were caused due to various socio-political,
environmental and security related issues. One may become the victim of environmentally induced
displacement repeatedly and at the same time the same person may experience conflict induced
displacement in their new place of residence or livelihood. For example, a person displaced by flood or
riverbank erosion may cross boundaries of native districts in search of livelihood and may end up
becoming a victim of conflict induced displacement as often happens in Assam. The displaced status then
does not remain a temporary or transitory status, but becomes permanent with the displaced person
waiting and struggling to survive in an all encompassing situation of fear, vulnerability and uncertainty. It
becomes a serial and multiple experience (Hussain, 2009). Although the Assam government is reluctant to
give numbers, floods and erosion are cited as one of the largest causes for displacement of people. The
magnitude of the problem can be understood from the fact that twenty seven out of the twenty nine
districts in the state experience floods every year.
Despite floods and irrigation being a state subject, the policies are formulated almost always by the
bureaucrats and technocrats in Delhi, most of who have little knowledge of the local conditions. So while
floods became an exclusive domain of engineers and technocrats, people got marginalised from a
lived environmental reality. “Nodi khon aami xourure pora dekhisu aru buju, kintu aamamk engineer Sir
hote eku nokoi” (we have seen the river since our childhood. We know it. But the engineers don't tell us
anything) was repeated very often in the field interviews. Those who live in symbiosis with nature, end up
being the first and subsequent victims of degradation. When such degradation happens, governments, at
their benevolent best seek to meet the damage with compensation, totally failing to realise that the loss is
much more than of just the habitat. That the environment is the basis of identities and communal pride, is
not comprehended by the decision makers in Guwahati and Delhi. As flood-policies become more
technocratic in nature, people get marginalised from a lived environmental and social reality. The
movement at the grassroots which is gaining stronghold, albeit of sheer disinterest to the national media, is
one which questions the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats and contractors who become the authority
[9]
to decide the future of the people of the land. It is in this context that Jha's argument holds true when he
says that disaster response would never address the concerns of communities on the margin until and
unless it is dealt at the level of social structures and institutions (Jha 2010). At a more abstract level,
modes of citizenship regulate the production of meaning on entitlements and obligations and generate
‘subject positions’ in which individuals can invest their identities (Foucault, 1982). In more concrete
terms, the precise configuration of entitlements and obligations (and whether they should be reciprocal)
will be subject to negotiation. And in the strategic context of ethico- political discourses, subject positions
provide the means through which politics is lived (Smith and Pangsapa, 2008).
Technological interventions have made policy making and democracy rather exclusionary to masses who
suffer on account of geographic and socio-political exclusion. In the current debates of environmental
citizenships, it argued that rather than treating science as an authoritative basis for action or an
unquestionable
‘resource’, science needs to be supplemented with authentic knowledge that accurately represents
the lives of those affected by environmental problems. Scientific knowledge should be seen as much as a
‘topic’ of research and open to deconstruction and problematisation as a resource. Science is not immune
from the politics of knowledge production such as willingness of political bodies and research councils to
address certain research questions and methodologies more than others (Smith & Pangsapa, 2008).
Science, technology and modernisation or development have not necessarily solved the age old problems
of subsistence crises or vulnerability to environmental threats. Application of these to particular areas
without taking into consideration the local realities, history and socio-economic structures have actually
aggravated the hazards and the vulnerability thereof. Natural disasters occur in a political space. They are
not driven by politics, nor are they immune from politics (Cohen and Werker 2008:795). Hence,
disasters are neither natural nor are they apolitical.
The flash floods in Uttarakhand in June 2013 laid bare the vulnerability of communities in the face of
extreme weather related events. Events caused by natural forces or natural disasters as these are more
commonly known to account for major destructions the world over. The past year of 2012 witnessed an
estimated 32.4 million across the world being affected by floods, earthquakes, cyclones, tropical storms
and forest fires; 98% of which were weather-related. Natural disasters in that sense are ubiquitous. While
natural disasters impact the developing world more, the developed world is not completely immune to
them. It was in 1989 that the United Nations had declared the decades of the 1990s as the International
[10]
Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)2 . Natural disasters have disastrous consequences for
human beings. Yet, only recently have social scientists begun to study natural disasters. This thesis strives
to contribute towards a socio– anthropological understanding of natural disasters. There exists a
reasonably large body of literature that looks at disasters as an one off event. But there is a dearth of
material that addresses the socio-cultural and political nature of disasters. This study problematises the
existing definitions of 'natural' and 'disasters'. It argues in favour of a nuanced and everyday understanding
of disasters which affect communities, nature and the State. In doing so it looks at people's knowledge of
disasters and contrasts it with the knowledge that the State propagates. For the purpose of this study floods
will be chosen as the context in which this dialectic will be examined.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Kale Vishwas S. (2015): In this paper an attempt has been made to quantitatively evaluate the
geomorphic effectiveness of three large magnitude floods occurred in 1959, 1968, and 1969 in the lower
Tapi basin. Flood hydrographs of these and other flood events show that the duration of floods can range
from 6 to 10 days, and in exceptional cases up to 15 days. Hence to produce substantial changes in the
alluvial sections of the Tapi River.
Kewalramani Gita.(2016): This paper attempts to examine the factors contributing to flooding in
Mumbai Suburban District in view of the need to implement a range of measures or management
practices, which would help alleviate this problem. This is vital as extreme rainfall events are likely to
become more common in future due to climate change.
Singh Yadvinder (2000): He focused on flood affected area of Inter-state Chandigarh Region, flood
affected area during 1988 and 1983, ISCR- flood intensity of affected area - 1993.
De U.S. and Dandekar M.M (2001): This paper analyses the data on disastrous weather events like
tropical cyclones, severe thunderstorms, tornados and extreme weather events like floods, droughts, heat
and cold waves in respect of fourteen major cities in India. The study brings out specific distribution of
these hazards across the cities and proposes some measures to minimize the losses from natural disasters.
Gadgil Alaka and Dandekar Supriya (2001): Author attempted to study the various weather hazards
with special reference to India. And analysis of flood events during the last three decades reveals that
Assam ranks first followed by Bihar, U.P., and West Bengal. All these states account for 40% of total
Floods reported.
[11]
Report of Water Directors of the European Union (EU) (2003): The Report gives guidelines on
important issues regarding sustainable flood prevention, protection, mitigation.
Department of Relief and Rehabilitation (2004): This report shows multi-disaster response plan which
include on overview of Dhule district and also Maharashtra Flood Report2005.
Ologunorisa T.E. and Abawua M.J. (2005): The paper explains some of the techniques of flood risk
assessment using case studies from different countries in the word. These techniques are meteorological,
hydrological, hydro meteorological and socio-economic and those based on Geographic Information
System (GIS). The paper concludes that GIS technique appears to be most promising as it is capable of
integrating all the other techniques of flood risk assessment.
CBSC, DELHI (2006): The text book explains flood is a state of high water level along a river channel.
Flood may happen gradually and also may take hours or even happen suddenly without any warning due
to breach in the embankment, spill over, heavy rains etc. In this book also including causes, adverse
effects and distribution pattern of flood in India.
Descriptive Research design is appropriate for this study. Descriptive study is used to study the situation.
This kind of study helps to describe the situation. A detail descriptive about present and past situation can
be found out by the descriptive study. In the proposed study, it involves the analysis of the situation using
the secondary data.
This research study is based on secondary data, means data that is already available i.e. the data which
have been already collected and analyzed by someone else.
[12]
Secondary data was used to make an analytical study on floods hazards. To collect the data, the researcher
were refer to articles, journals, reports collected from the NGOs, voluntary organisations, local private and
public libraries, national and state level news papers, locally published periodicals and magazines on
floods.
DATA SOURCES
The data sources to be used were the articles, journals, reference books and Literature Review published
by third parties but available to the public. The World Wide Web (Internet) is also an important
source of information related to Flood Hazards.
[13]
CHAPTER 2
[14]
FLOOD
A flood is an overflow of water that submerges land which is usually dry. The European Union (EU)
Floods Directive defines a flood as a covering by water of land not normally covered by water. In the
sense of "flowing water", the word may also be applied to the inflow of the tide. Flooding may occur as an
overflow of water from water bodies, such as a river or lake, in which the water overtops or breaks levees,
resulting in some of that water escaping its usual boundaries, or it may occur due to an accumulation of
rainwater on saturated ground in an areal flood. While the size of a lake or other body of water will vary
with seasonal changes in precipitation and snow melt, these changes in size are unlikely to be considered
significant unless they flood property or drown domestic animals.
Floods can also occur in rivers when the flow rate exceeds the capacity of the river channel, particularly at
bends or meanders in the waterway. Floods often cause damage to homes and businesses if they are in the
natural flood plains of rivers. While riverine flood damage can be eliminated by moving away from rivers
and other bodies of water, people have traditionally lived and worked by rivers because the land is usually
flat and fertile and because rivers provide easy travel and access to commerce and industry.
Some floods develop slowly, while others such as flash floods, can develop in just a few minutes and
without visible signs of rain. Additionally, floods can be local, impacting a neighborhood or community,
or very large, affecting entire river basins.
CAUSES OF FLOOD
Assam continues to be on edge as the flood, which has almost become an annual calamity, has claimed 66
people till Monday. The situation is grim situation in the state as 30.55 lakh people have so far been
affected due to the deluge, as per an official report.
[15]
One of the key reasons for annual deluge in the state is the high percentage of flood prone region.
According to the Rastriya Barh Ayog (RBA), 31.05 lakh hectares of the total 78.523 lakh hectares area of
the state is prone to frequent floods. And the reasons behind this high flood prone area percentage are both
man-made and natural.
EARTHQUAKES/LANDSLIDES
Assam and some other parts of the northeastern region are prone to frequent earthquakes, which causes
landslides. The landslides and earthquakes send in a lot of debris in the rivers, causing the river bed to
rise.
BANK EROSION
Assam has also faced bank erosion around the Brahmaputra and Barak rivers as well as their tributaries. It
is estimated that annually nearly 8000 hectares land is lost to erosion. Bank erosion has also affected the
width of the Brahmaputra river, which has increased up to 15 km. The damage cost due to bank erosion is
estimated to be of several hundred crore every year.
DAMS
Among the man-made reasons, the key cause of floods in Assam region is releasing of water from dams
situated uphill. Unregulated release of water floods the Assam plains, leaving thousands of people
homeless every year.
[16]
PRINCIPAL TYPES AND CAUSES
AREAL (RAINFALL-RELATED)
Floods can happen on flat or low-lying areas when the ground is saturated and water either cannot run off
or cannot run off quickly enough to stop accumulating. This may be followed by a river flood as water
moves away from the floodplain into local rivers and streams.
Floods can also occur if water falls on an impermeable surface, such as concrete, paving or frozen ground,
and cannot rapidly dissipate into the ground.
Localized heavy rain from a series of storms moving over the same area can cause areal flash flooding
when the rate of rainfall exceeds the drainage capacity of the area. When this occurs on tilled fields, it can
result in a muddy flood where sediments are picked up by run off and carried as suspended matter or bed
load.
RIVERINE
River or rambla flows may rise to flood levels at different rates, from a few minutes to several weeks,
depending on the type of river or rambla and the source of the increased flow.
[17]
Slow-rising floods most commonly occur in large rivers with large catchment areas. The increase in flow
may be the result of sustained rainfall, rapid snow melt, monsoons, or tropical cyclones. Localized
flooding may be caused or exacerbated by drainage obstructions such as landslides, ice, or debris.
Rapid flooding events, including flash floods, more often occur on smaller rivers, rivers with steep
valleys, rivers that flow for much of their length over impermeable terrain, or ramblas. The cause may be
localized convective precipitation (intense thunderstorms) or sudden release from an upstream
impoundment created behind a dam, landslide, or glacier.
Dam-building beavers can flood low-lying urban and rural areas, occasionally causing some damage.
Flooding in estuaries is commonly caused by a combination of sea tidal surges caused by winds and low
barometric pressure, and they may be exacerbated by high upstream river flow.
Coastal areas may be flooded by storm events at sea, resulting in waves over-topping defenses or in severe
cases by tsunami or tropical cyclones. A storm surge, from either a tropical cyclone or an extratropical
cyclone, falls within this category.
[18]
URBAN FLOODING
Urban flooding is the inundation of land or property in a built environment, particularly in more densely
populated areas, caused by rainfall overwhelming the capacity of drainage systems, such as storm sewers.
Although sometimes triggered by events such as flash flooding or snowmelt, urban flooding is a condition,
characterized by its repetitive and systemic impacts on communities, that can happen regardless of
whether or not affected communities are located within formally designated floodplains or near any body
of water. There are several ways in which stormwater enters properties: backup through sewer pipes,
toilets and sinks into buildings; seepage through building walls and floors; the accumulation of water on
property and in public rights-of-way; and the overflow from water bodies such as rivers and lakes.
The flood flow in urbanized areas constitutes a hazard to both the population and infrastructure. Some
recent catastrophes include the inundations of Nîmes (France) in 1998 and Vaison-la-Romaine (France) in
1992, the flooding of New Orleans (USA) in 2005, and the flooding in Rockhampton, Bundaberg,
Brisbane during the 2010–2011 summer in Queensland (Australia). Flood flows in urban environments
have been studied relatively recently despite many centuries of flood events. Some researchers have
mentioned the storage effect in urban areas. Several studies have looked into the flow patterns and
redistribution in streets during storm events and the implication on flood modelling. Some recent research
has considered the criteria for safe evacuation of individuals in flooded areas. However, some recent field
measurements during the 2010–2011 Queensland floods showed that any criterion solely based upon the
flow velocity, water depth or specific momentum cannot account for the hazards caused by velocity and
water depth fluctuations. These considerations ignore further the risks associated with large debris
entrained by the flow motion.
[19]
CATASTROPHIC
Catastrophic flooding is usually associated with major infrastructure failures such as the collapse of a
dam, but they may also be caused by damage sustained in an earthquake or volcanic eruption.
[20]
EFFECTS
PRIMARY EFFECTS
The primary effects of flooding include loss of life, damage to buildings and other structures, including
bridges, sewerage systems, roadways, and canals.
Floods also frequently damage power transmission and sometimes power generation, which then has
knock-on effects caused by the loss of power. This includes loss of drinking water treatment and water
supply, which may result in loss of drinking water or severe water contamination. It may also cause the
loss of sewage disposal facilities. Lack of clean water combined with human sewage in the flood waters
raises the risk of waterborne diseases, which can include typhoid, giardia, cryptosporidium, cholera and
many other diseases depending upon the location of the flood.
Damage to roads and transport infrastructure may make it difficult to mobilize aid to those affected or to
provide emergency health treatment.
Flood waters typically inundate farm land, making the land unworkable and preventing crops from being
planted or harvested, which can lead to shortages of food both for humans and farm animals. Entire
harvests for a country can be lost in extreme flood circumstances. Some tree species may not survive
prolonged flooding of their root systems.
Economic hardship due to a temporary decline in tourism, rebuilding costs, or food shortages leading to
price increases is a common after-effect of severe flooding. The impact on those affected may cause
psychological damage to those affected, in particular where deaths, serious injuries and loss of property
occur.
Urban flooding can lead to chronically wet houses, which are linked to an increase in respiratory problems
and other illnesses. Urban flooding also has significant economic implications for affected neighborhoods.
In the United States, industry experts estimate that wet basements can lower property values by 10-25
percent and are cited among the top reasons for not purchasing a home. According to the U.S. Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), almost 40 percent of small businesses never reopen their doors
following a flooding disaster.
[21]
IMPACT OF DISASTER IN AFFECTED AREAS
Disaster impacts comprise physical and social impact. The physical impacts of disasters include casualties
(deaths and injuries) and property damage, and both vary substantially across hazard agents. The physical
impacts of a disaster are usually the most obvious, easily measured, and first reported by the news media.
Social impacts, which include psychosocial, demographic, economic, and political impacts, can develop
over a long period of time and can be difficult to assess when they occur. Despite the difficulty in
measuring these social impacts, it is nonetheless important to monitor them, and even to predict them if
possible, because they can cause significant problems for the long-term functioning of specific types of
households and businesses in an affected community. A better understanding of disasters’ social impacts
can provide a basis for preimpact prediction and the development of contingency plans to prevent adverse
consequences from occurring.
PHYSICAL IMPACTS
Casualties. According to Noji (1997b), hurricanes produced 16 of the 65 greatest disasters of the 20th
Century (in terms of deaths) and the greatest number of deaths from 1947-1980 (499,000). Earthquakes
produced 28 of the greatest disasters and 450,000 deaths, whereas floods produced four of the greatest
disasters and 194,000 deaths. Other significant natural disasters include volcanic eruptions with nine of
the greatest disasters and 9,000 deaths, landslides with four of the greatest disasters and 5,000 deaths, and
tsunamis with three of the greatest disasters and 5,000 deaths. There is significant variation by country,
with developing countries in Asia, Africa, and South America accounting for the top 20 positions in terms
of number of deaths from 1966-1990. Low-income countries suffer approximately 3,000 deaths per
disaster, whereas the corresponding figure for high-income countries is approximately 500 deaths per
disaster. Moreover, these disparities appear to be increasing because the average annual death toll in
developed countries declined by at least 75% between 1960 and 1990, but the same time period saw
increases of over 400% in developing countries (Berke, 1995).
There often are difficulties in determining how many of the deaths and injuries are “caused by” a disaster.
In some cases it is impossible to determine how many persons are missing and, if so, whether this is due to
death or unrecorded relocation. The size of the error in estimates of disaster death tolls can be seen in the
fact that for many of the most catastrophic events the number of deaths is rounded to the nearest thousand
[22]
and some even are rounded to the nearest ten thousand (Noji, 1997b). Estimates of injuries are similarly
problematic (see Langness, 1994; Peek-Asa, et al., 1998; Shoaf, et al., 1998, regarding conflicting
estimates of deaths and injuries attributable to the Northridge earthquake). Even when bodies can be
counted, there are problems because disaster impact may be only a contributing factor to casualties with
pre-existing health conditions. Moreover, some casualties are indirect consequences of the hazard agent
as, for example, with casualties caused by structural fires following earthquakes (e.g., burns) and
destruction of infrastructure (e.g., illnesses from contaminated water supplies).
Damage. Losses of structures, animals, and crops also are important measures of physical impacts, and
these are rising exponentially in the United States (Mileti, 1999). However, the rate of increase is even
greater in developing countries such as India and Kenya (Berke, 1995). Such losses usually result from
physical damage or destruction of property, but they also can be caused by losses of land use to chemical
or radiological contamination or loss of the land itself to subsidence or erosion. Damage to the built
environment can be classified broadly as affecting residential, commercial, industrial, infrastructure, or
community services sectors. Moreover, damage within each of these sectors can be divided into damage to
structures and damage to contents. It usually is the case that damage to contents results from collapsing
structures (e.g., hurricane winds failing the building envelope and allowing rain to destroy the furniture
inside the building). Because collapsing buildings are a major cause of casualties as well, this suggests
that strengthening the structure will protect the contents and occupants. However, some hazard agents can
damage building contents without affecting the structure itself (e.g., earthquakes striking seismically-
resistant buildings whose contents are not securely fastened). Thus, risk area residents may need to adopt
additional hazard adjustments to protect contents and occupants even if they already have structural
protection.
Perhaps the most significant structural impact of a disaster on a stricken community is the destruction of
households’ dwellings. Such an event initiates what can be a very long process of disaster recovery for
some population segments. According to Quarantelli (1982a), people typically pass through four stages of
housing recovery following a disaster. The first stage is emergency shelter, which consists of unplanned
and spontaneously sought locations that are intended only to provide protection from the elements,
typically open yards and cars after earthquakes (Bolin & Stanford, 1991, 1998). The next step is
temporary shelter, which includes food preparation and sleeping facilities that usually are sought from
friends and relatives or are found in commercial lodging, although “mass care” facilities in school
gymnasiums or church auditoriums are acceptable as a last resort. The third step is temporary housing,
[23]
which allows victims to re-establish household routines in nonpreferred locations or structures. The last
step is permanent housing, which re-establishes household routines in preferred locations and structures.
Households vary in the progression and duration of each type of housing and the transition from one stage
to another can be delayed unpredictably, as when it took nine days for shelter occupancy to peak after the
Whittier Narrows earthquake (Bolin, 1993). Particularly significant are the problems faced by lower
income households, which tend to be headed disproportionately by females and racial/ethnic minorities.
Such households are more likely to experience destruction of their homes because of preimpact locational
vulnerability. This is especially true in developing countries such as Guatemala (Peacock, Killian & Bates,
1987), but also has been reported in the US (Peacock & Girard, 1997). The homes of these households
also are more likely to be destroyed because the structures were built according to older, less stringent
building codes, used lower quality construction materials and methods, and were less well maintained
(Bolin & Bolton, 1986). Because lower income households have fewer resources on which to draw for
recovery, they also take longer to transition through the stages of housing, sometimes remaining for
extended periods of time in severely damaged homes (Girard & Peacock, 1997). In other cases, they are
forced to accept as permanent what originally was intended as temporary housing (Peacock, et al., 1987).
Consequently, there may still be low-income households in temporary sheltering and temporary housing
even after high-income households all have relocated to permanent housing (Berke, et al., 1993; Rubin,
Sapperstein & Barbee, 1985).
As is the case with estimates of casualties, estimates of losses to the built environment are prone to error.
Damage estimates are most accurate when trained damage assessors enter each building to assess the
percent of damage to each of the major structural systems (e.g., roof, walls, floors) and the percentage
reduction in market valuation due to the damage. Early approximate estimates are obtained by conducting
“windshield surveys” in which trained damage assessors drive through the impact area and estimate the
extent of damage that is visible from the street, or by conducting computer analyses using HAZUS
(National Institute of Building Sciences, 1998). These early approximate estimates are especially
important in major disasters because detailed assessments are not needed in the early stages of disaster
recovery and the time required to conduct them on a large number of damaged structures using a limited
number of qualified inspectors would unnecessarily delay the community recovery process.
Other important physical impacts include damage or contamination to cropland, rangeland, and
woodlands. Such impacts may be well understood for some hazard agents but not others. For example,
ashfall from the 1980 Mt. St. Helens eruption was initially expected to devastate crops and livestock in
[24]
downwind areas, but no significant losses materialized (Warrick, et al., 1981). There also is concern about
damage or contamination to the natural environment (wild lands) because these areas serve valuable
functions such as damping the extremes of river discharge and providing habitat for wildlife. In part,
concern arises from the potential for indirect consequences such as increased runoff and silting of
downstream river beds, but many people also are concerned about the natural environment simply because
they value it for its own sake.
Social Impacts
For many years, research on the social impacts of disasters consisted of an accumulation of case studies,
but two research teams conducted comprehensive statistical analyses of extensive databases to assess the
long-term effects of disasters on stricken communities (Friesma, et al., 1979; Wright, et al., 1979). The
more comprehensive Wright, et al. (1979) study used census data from the 1960 (preimpact) and 1970
(post-impact) censuses to assess the effects of all recorded disasters in the United States. The authors
concurred with earlier findings by Friesma, et al. (1979) in concluding no long-term social impact of
disasters could be detected at the community level. In discussing their findings, the authors acknowledged
their results were dominated by the types of disasters occurring most frequently in the United States—
tornadoes, floods, and hurricanes. Moreover, most of the disasters they studied had a relatively small
scope of impact and thus caused only minimal disruption to their communities even in the short term.
Finally, they noted their findings did not preclude the possibility of significant long-term impacts upon
lower levels such as the neighborhood, business, and household.
Nonetheless, their findings called attention to the importance of the impact ratio—the amount of damage
divided by the amount of community resources—in understanding disaster impacts. They hypothesized
long-term social impacts tend to be minimal in the US because most hazard agents have a relatively small
scope of impact and tend to strike undeveloped areas more frequently than intensely developed areas
simply because there are more of the former than the latter. Thus, the numerator of the impact ratio tends
to be low and local resources are sufficient to prevent long-term effects from occurring. Even when a
disaster has a large scope of impact and strikes a large developed area (causing a large impact ratio in the
short term), state and federal agencies and NGOs (e.g., American Red Cross) direct recovery resources to
the affected area, thus preventing long-term impacts from occurring. For example, Hurricane Andrew
inflicted $26.5 billion in losses to the Miami area, but this was only 0.4% of the US GDP (Charvériat,
2000). Recovery problems described in the studies reported in Peacock, Morrow and Gladwin (1997) were
determined more by organizational impediments than by the lack of resources.
[25]
Psychosocial impacts. Research reviews conducted over a period of 25 years have concluded that
disasters can cause a wide range of negative psychological responses (Bolin 1985; Gerrity & Flynn, 1997;
Houts, Cleary & Hu, 1988; Perry & Lindell, 1978). These include psychophysiological effects such as
fatigue, gastrointestinal upset, and tics, as well as cognitive signs such as confusion, impaired
concentration, and attention deficits. Psychological impacts include emotional signs such as anxiety,
depression, and grief. They also include behavioral effects such as sleep and appetite changes, ritualistic
behavior, and substance abuse. In most cases, the observed effects are mild and transitory—the result of
“normal people, responding normally, to a very abnormal situation” (Gerrity & Flynn 1997, p. 108). Few
disaster victims require psychiatric diagnosis and most benefit more from a crisis counseling orientation
than from a mental health treatment orientation, especially if their normal social support networks of
friends, relatives, neighbors, and coworkers remain largely intact. However, there are population segments
requiring special attention and active outreach. These include children, frail elderly, people with pre-
existing mental illness, racial and ethnic minorities, and families of those who have died in the disaster.
Emergency workers also need attention because they often work long hours without rest, have witnessed
horrific sights, and are members of organizations in which discussion of emotional issues may be regarded
as a sign of weakness (Rubin, 1991).
The negative psychological impacts described above, which Lazarus and Folkman (1984) call emotion
focused coping, generally disrupt the social functioning of only a very small portion of the victim
population. Instead, the majority of disaster victims engage in adaptive problem focused coping activities
to save their own lives and those of their closest associates. Further, there is an increased incidence in
prosocial behaviors such as donating material aid and a decreased incidence of antisocial behaviors such
as crime (Drabek, 1986; Mileti, et al., 1975; Siegel, et al., 1999). In some cases, people even engage in
altruistic behaviors that risk their own lives to save the lives of others (Tierney, et al., 2001).
There also are psychological impacts with long-term adaptive consequences, such as changes in risk
perception (beliefs in the likelihood of the occurrence a disaster and its personal consequences for the
individual) and increased hazard intrusiveness (frequency of thought and discussion about a hazard). In
turn, these beliefs can affect risk area residents’ adoption of household hazard adjustments that reduce
their vulnerability to future disasters. However, these cognitive impacts of disaster experience do not
appear to be large in aggregate, resulting in modest effects on household hazard adjustment (see Lindell &
Perry, 2000 for a review of the literature on seismic hazard adjustment, and Lindell & Prater 2000; Lindell
& Whitney, 2000; and Whitney, Lindell & Nguyen, 2004 for more recent empirical research).
[26]
Demographic impacts. The demographic impact of a disaster can be assessed by adapting the
demographic balancing equation, Pa – Pb = B – D + IM – OM, where Pa is the population size after the
disaster, Pb is the population size before the disaster, B is the number of births, D is the number of deaths,
IM is the number of immigrants, and OM is the number of emigrants (Smith, Tayman & Swanson, 2001).
The magnitude of the disaster impact, Pa – Pb, is computed for the population of a specific geographical
area and two specific points in time. Ideally, the geographical area would correspond to the disaster
impact area, Pb would be immediately before disaster impact, and Pa would be immediately after disaster
impact. In practice, population data are available for census divisions (census block, block group, tract, or
larger area), so a Geographical Information System (GIS) must be used to estimate the impact on the
impact area. Moreover, population data are likely to be most readily available from the decennial
censuses, so the overall population change and its individual demographic components—births, deaths,
immigration, and emigration—are likely to be estimated from that source (e.g., Wright, et al., 1979). On
rare occasions, special surveys have been conducted in the aftermath of disaster (e.g., Peacock, Morrow &
Gladwin, 1997). The limited research available on demographic impacts (Friesma, et al., 1979; Wright, et
al., 1979) suggests disasters have negligible demographic impacts on American communities, but the
highly aggregated level of analysis in these studies does not preclude the possibility of significant impacts
at lower levels of aggregation (census tracts, block groups, or blocks). Although it is logically possible
that disasters could affect the number of births, it does not seem likely that the effect would be large.
Moreover, as noted in the previous section on physical impacts, the number of deaths from disasters in the
United States has been small relative to historical levels (e.g., the 6000 deaths in the 1900 Galveston
hurricane were approximately 17% of the city’s population) or to the levels reported in developing
countries. The major demographic impacts of disasters are likely to be the (temporary) immigration of
construction workers after major disasters and the emigration of population segments that have lost
housing. In many cases, the housing-related emigration is also temporary, but there are documented cases
in which housing reconstruction has been delayed indefinitely—leading to “ghost towns” (Comerio,
1998). Other potential causes of emigration are psychological impacts (belief that the likelihood of
disaster recurrence is unacceptably high), economic impacts (loss of jobs or community services), or
political impacts (increased neighborhood or community conflict).
Economic impacts. The property damage caused by disaster impact creates losses in asset values that can
be measured by the cost of repair or replacement (Committee on Assessing the Costs of Natural Disasters,
1999). Disaster losses in United States are initially borne by the affected households, businesses, and local
government agencies whose property is damaged or destroyed.
[27]
However, some of these losses are redistributed during the disaster recovery process. There have been
many attempts to estimate the magnitude of direct losses from individual disasters and the annual average
losses from particular types of hazards (e.g., Mileti, 1999). Unfortunately, these losses are difficult to
determine precisely because there is no organization that tracks all of the relevant data and some data are
not recorded at all (Charvériat, 2000; Committee on Assessing the Costs of Natural Disasters, 1999). For
insured property, the insurers record the amount of the deductible and the reimbursed loss, but uninsured
losses are not recorded so they must be estimated—often with questionable accuracy.
The ultimate economic impact of a disaster depends upon the disposition of the damaged assets. Some of
these assets are not replaced, so their loss causes a reduction in consumption (and, thus, a decrease in the
quality of life) or a reduction in investment (and, thus, a decrease in economic productivity). Other assets
are replaced—either through in-kind donations (e.g., food and clothing) or commercial purchases. In the
latter case, the cost of replacement must come from some source of recovery funding, which generally can
be characterized as either intertemporal transfers (to the present time from past savings or future loan
payments) or interpersonal transfers (from one group to another at a given time). Some of the specific
mechanisms for financing recovery include obtaining tax deductions or deferrals, unemployment benefits,
loans (paying back the principal at low- or no-interest), grants (requiring no return of principal), insurance
payoffs, or additional employment. Other sources include depleting cash financial assets (e.g., savings
accounts), selling tangible assets, or migrating to an area with available housing, employment, or less risk
(in some cases this is done by the principal wage earner only).
In addition to direct economic losses, there are indirect losses that arise from the interdependence of
community subunits. Research on the economic impacts of disasters (Alesch, et al., 1993; Dacy &
Kunreuther, 1969; Dalhamer & D’Sousa, 1997; Durkin, 1984; Gordon, et al., 1995; Kroll, et al., 1991;
Lindell & Perry, 1998; Nigg, 1995; Tierney, 1997a) suggests the relationships among the social units
within a community can be described as a state of dynamic equilibrium involving a steady flow of
resources, especially money. Specifically, a household’s linkages with the community are defined by the
money it must pay for products, services, and infrastructure support. This money is obtained from the
wages that employers pay for the household’s labor. Similarly, the linkages that a business has with the
community are defined by the money it provides to its employees, suppliers, and infrastructure in
exchange for inputs such as labor, materials and services, and electric power, fuel, water/wastewater,
telecommunications, and transportation. Conversely, it provides products or services to customers in
exchange for the money it uses to pay for its inputs.
[28]
It also is important to recognize the financial impacts of recovery (in addition to the financial impacts of
emergency response) on local government. Costs must be incurred for tasks such as damage assessment,
emergency demolition, debris removal, infrastructure restoration, and re-planning stricken areas. In
addition to these costs, there are decreased revenues due to loss or deferral of sales taxes, business taxes,
property taxes, personal income taxes, and user fees.
Political impacts. There is substantial evidence that disaster impacts can cause social activism resulting in
political disruption, especially during the seemingly interminable period of disaster recovery. The disaster
recovery period is a source of many victim grievances and this creates many opportunities for community
conflict, both in the US (Bolin 1982, 1993) and abroad (Bates & Peacock 1988). Victims usually attempt
to recreate preimpact housing patterns, but it can be problematic for their neighbors if victims attempt to
site mobile homes on their own lots while awaiting the reconstruction of permanent housing. Conflicts
arise because such housing usually is considered to be a blight on the neighborhood and neighbors are
afraid the “temporary” housing will become permanent. Neighbors also are pitted against each other when
developers attempt to buy up damaged or destroyed properties and build multifamily units on lots
previously zoned for single family dwellings. Such rezoning attempts are a major threat to the market
value of owner-occupied homes but tend to have less impact on renters because they have less incentive to
remain in the neighborhood. There are exceptions to this generalization because some ethnic groups have
very close ties to their neighborhoods, even if they rent rather than own.
Attempts to change prevailing patterns of civil governance can arise when individuals sharing a grievance
about the handling of the recovery process seek to redress that grievance through collective action.
Consistent with Dynes’s (1970) typology of organizations, existing community groups with an explicit
political agenda can expand their membership to increase their strength, whereas community groups
without an explicit political agenda can extend their domains to include disaster-related grievances.
Alternatively, new groups can emerge to influence local, state, or federal government agencies and
legislators to take actions that they support and to terminate actions that they disapprove. Indeed, such was
the case for Latinos in Watsonville, California following the Loma Prieta earthquake (Tierney, et al.,
2001). Usually, community action groups pressure government to provide additional resources for
recovering from disaster impact, but may oppose candidates’ re-elections or even seek to recall some
politicians from office (Olson & Drury, 1997; Prater & Lindell, 2000; Shefner, 1999). The point here is
not that disasters produce political behavior that is different from that encountered in normal life. Rather,
disaster impacts might only produce a different set of victims and grievances and, therefore, a minor
variation on the prevailing political agenda (Morrow & Peacock, 1997).
[29]
CHAPTER 3
In this policy statement the objective set before the nation was to rid the country from the menace of
floods by containing and managing floods. This objective was afterwards modified to say that reasonable
protection that was technically and economically justifiable is to be provided, with greater stress on flood
forecasting, flood warning and flood management (Thakkar, 2006). The philosophy of the flood policy
was set to change and become more realistic when the same Minister said in the Parliament on July 27,
1956, less than two years after announcing the National Flood Policy, that absolute immunity from flood
damage was not physically possible even in the distant future, because of the unpredictability of several
natural forces which might cause unprecedented situation. The emphasis was rather on ‘learning to learn
to live with floods to an extent’ (RBA, 1980 p 98). Thus it is seen that although structural measures and
embankments were emphasized from the very first policy on floods in independent India, their
limitations were also recognized from the beginning. Therefore it was rightly said in the same context
that “no single measure can provide a complete answer to the problem of floods. Each case will have to be
considered on its merits and a measure or a combination of measures adopted if a proper solution is to be
found out” (Mishra, 2002). Hence, the approach of 'living with floods' was recognised by the 1980 RBA
report.
After this initiation, a number of steps were taken in the form of constitution of committees, commissions,
task forces and formulation of policies etc. to study different aspects of flood problems, assess
Government programmes and recommend strategies to deal with flood and erosion problems of
various regions of India. Amongst these initiatives the Report of the National Commission on Floods is
considered path breaking. The National Flood Commission (Rashtriya Barh Ayog) was constituted in
1976 by the Government of India ‘to evolve a coordinated, integrated and scientific approach to the flood
control problems in the country and to draw out a national plan fixing priorities for implementation in the
future’. Its report, regarded as an important document reflecting the realities of the flood management
[31]
regime of the country evaluated the country’s approach to and programmes on flood control since 1954
and provides important policy guideline for future flood management in the country. The RBA made 204
recommendations, but hardly any of the recommendations were followed up till date as found from
reviews by the Central Water Commission in 1987 and the National Commission for Integrated Water
Resources Development (NCIWRD) in 1999. The Ministry of Water Resources itself admits that ‘not
much progress has been made in the implementation of its recommendations’. As such, the MWR set up
an Expert Committee on 19.10.2001 to review the Implementation of recommendations of NFC, to
identify the difficulties faced by the State Governments in the implementation and to suggest measures for
implementation of the NFC recommendations for effective flood management in the country. The report
of the committee is still under examination in the Ministry of Water Resources.
The report of the NCIWRD submitted on 01.12.1999 observed that there are no universal solutions which
can provide complete protection against floods. It therefore recommends a shift in strategy from structural
implements towards efficient management of flood plains, flood proofing, and disaster preparedness and
response planning, flood forecasting and warning and other non structural measures such as disaster relief,
flood fighting including public health measures and flood insurance (Thakkar, 2006).” The report further
suggests that performance review of selected embankments may be carried out and based on the findings,
planning, designs and management of embankments may be reviewed for obtaining better results. It also
recognizes the importance of associating the beneficiaries in the upkeep and surveillance of embankments
during the monsoon season for prevention of possible breaching.”
The Report of the ‘Task Force on Flood Management and Erosion Control’ constituted by the Government
of India in the aftermath of the catastrophic floods in northeastern, eastern and northern India in 2004 also
provides guidelines for flood protection work(MoWR, 2004). The Task Force recommended several
measures to ensure flow of adequate financial resources to the states to implement flood management
measures. It suggests that flood control schemes should be funded through the Centrally Sponsored
Scheme in the ratio of 90% Central and 10% State in place of the present ratio of 75:25. It asks the
Government to earmark funds in the state sector as additional central assistance for maintenance of
embankments. It introduced the idea of ‘a flood cess’ of 1% to 2% that could be levied on new
infrastructure like roads, buildings, power plants etc. in the flood prone states to mobilize resources for a
revolving fund to be used for flood protection in the states.
The report emphasised plugging of breaches urgently on embankments, raising and strengthening of
embankments, bank protection, anti-erosion works and construction of high rise platforms, providing
sluices in embankments, providing weak sections of embankments with fuse plugs and construction of
[32]
drainage development schemes as short-term measures. The Task Force report advocates for storage
reservoir projects on upstream of flood causing rivers in Assam to find a ‘permanent solution to the
problem of floods and erosion’. Further it suggests non-structural measures such as revival and
maintenance of wetlands, watershed management, flood plain zoning, extension and modernization of
flood forecasting and warning systems etc. It also advocates for community Participation in maintenance
of embankments.
The above mentioned commissions on flood gave valuable recommendations on different aspects of flood
management. However, barring the structural ones, not too many were taken up and implemented. Despite
all efforts, flood prone areas only kept increasing. The most clinching evidence of floods having increased
as a physical phenomena is clear in the Rashtriya Barh Ayog Report of 1980 which found that the
country’s flood prone area that had been estimated at about 25 mha in the 1960s and went up to 34 mha in
the 1980s. This revealed that despite protection to about 10mha of flood prone areas, in just about a
decade, the flood prone areas in the country had gone up to 40mha (Agarwal & Chak, 1991). This is
despite the conservative method of estimation that took the maximum affected areas in all the states in a
given year discounting the fact that newer areas may get affected at later times. RBA in its report (1980)
had assessed the area liable to floods as 40 million hectares. It was determined by summing up the
maximum area affected by floods in any one year in each state during the period from 1953 to 1978 for
which data was analysed by the Ayog.
Thus, the dominant engineering responses to floods of the modern societies have been guided by a
perceived need for controlling floods rather than managing them. Following the devastating floods of
1954, the government swung into action. In the first Five Year Plan, there were mentions of non
structural interventions like flood warning and watershed management programmes, following heavy
criticisms in Parliament, but the policy makers found it difficult to let go of what Bandyopadhyay (2009)
calls the reductionist view of floods. Hence, rather than recognising the failures of European
engineering and obstruction of riverine flows, the post-colonial State with a renewed vigour started
constructing new structures, pre dominantly embankments and dams in an attempt to eliminate floods.
While the attempts were rooted in welfare, where the state lacked was the vision to comprehend the
resultant challenges of such large scale interferences in the riverine flow. Floods in India, from being a
natural phenomenon, got caught in the traditional perceptions of engineers belonging to European
knowledge systems, became unmixed hazards that are injurious to human life, property and economic
activities (ibid.). As year after year, flood control became a more bureaucratic affair, the people who
actually lived and experienced floods, became far removed from the decisions that directly affected their
[33]
lives. Growth of structural interference in the flow of the river had increased cumulatively. Initially most
sections of people were also elated at the idea of freedom from floods. However, as the consequences of
flood control became clearer, that idea was abandoned and concern arose over structural interventions.
Modern flood control measures are neither very successful nor are they people friendly (Mishra, 2001).
The idea that flood regulation is not flood prevention rather it is a way of transforming the destructiveness
into a blessing, which is not a new position has been relegated to the background. Ignoring time tested
methods and indigenous experience has cost the nation dearly. Rather techniques developed and meant for
totally different physical environments were applied with gusto (Munsi, 1998). Thus, flood control
systems have remained mostly just those despite the change in nomenclature to flood management. The
problem is that a development model and development technology that started in Europe, got exported to
India, where the British trained new cadres of professional engineers and civil servants to implement the
projects. The continuity of policy, the unquestioned acceptance of the urban–road–rail development
model, and the grand city-saving projects like the Farakka barrage, suggests that it is as much in this
professionalism as in political alignments that the problems occur (Chapman & Rudra, 2007).
Under the Constitution of India, a state government has the power to make laws in respect of water
resources of that state. The Parliament has the power to legislate the regulation and development of
interstate rivers. Thus the authority of the state Government over water can be exercised, subject to certain
limitations that may be imposed by the Parliament. As most of the rivers in the country are inter-State, the
regulation and development of waters of these rivers, is a source of inter-State differences and disputes. In
the Constitution, water is a matter included in Entry 17 of List-II i.e. State List. Entry 17 under List II of
Seventh Schedule provides that "Water, that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, drainage and
embankments, water storage and water power subject to the provisions of Entry 56 of List I". This entry is
subject to the provision of Entry 56 of List I which is the Union List. As such, the Central Government is
conferred with powers to regulate and develop inter-State rivers under Entry 56 of List I of Seventh
Schedule to the extent declared by the Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest. It also has
the power to make laws for the adjudication of any dispute relating to waters of Inter-State River or river
valley under Article 262 of the Constitution (Ministry of Water Resources, n.d.). So far the Parliament has
not made much use of the powers vested in it by the Entry 56 of the Union List. In view of the supremacy
of the parliament, it is not totally right to say that water is a state subject. Moreover, most of India’s
important rivers are inter- state. Hence, water is potentially as much a union subject as a state subject.
Further, the legislative power of a state under Entry 17 has to be exercised in such a manner that the
interests of other states do not suffer adversely and a dispute is created. The power and role given to the
Union Government with regard to the management of inter-state rivers is very important and necessary. In
[34]
this context, the provisions of Entry 20 in the Concurrent List, namely, economic and social planning, are
also quite relevant. By virtue of this provision, the major and medium irrigation, hydropower, flood
control and multi-purpose projects are required to seek clearance of the central government for inclusion
in the national plan (NIH, n.d.). As is evident from the policies related to water in general and floods in
particular remain a subject of the Centre.
The dichotomy between the states and the Centre has resulted in a situation that has worsened the flood
scenario in the country. Further to this, lack of accountability and responsibility on the states's part has
made floods a governance issue with very severe consequences for the people. Floods have become far
greater than an annual hydrological phenomena. For the state of Assam, floods are a very complex issue
which has bearings on the state's very existence. Coupled with erosion and displacement, the ramifications
because of the international nature of the issue, are a serious challenge to governments, both in the Centre
and at Dispur and the people of the state. In essence the policies in flood management being pursued in
India is literally the same as adopted in the nineteen fifties with only the immediate and short term
measures like embankments being promoted more vigorously than other measures.
Government's role in disaster management is to provide a central, coordinated plan of action to address the
damage caused by such an event as well as the needs of the people affected.
Identification
When a disaster such as a flood, hurricane, or earthquake occurs within the United States, the Federal
Emergency Manangement Agency (FEMA) is responsible for coordinating assistance and resources to the
particular region. FEMA, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, was created in 1979.
FEMA has established a set of procedures, the National Response Framework, that identifies the
principles, roles, and structures to direct government response in times of disaster. The protocols provide
coordination among state, local, and federal resources. Specialists from various fields are assigned specific
roles and objectives. Rebuilding damaged areas and relief efforts are also part of the National Response
Framework.
Emergency Management
[35]
Government's role in disaster management is to address the degree of risk present within an emergency
situation. Hazardous conditions may be present, such as polluted water supplies, damaged power lines,
and inadequate housing. When needed, civil defense units such as the National Guard may be called to
maintain order within a disaster situation. Emergency management also involves providing the support
necessary to prepare and rebuild a community in the aftermath of a disaster.
FEMA is made up of emergency response teams located throughout the country. These teams act as
branches of the federal government during times of crisis. The National Disaster Medical System prepares
and organizes these teams. Each team is trained within a different specialty area including search and
rescue, medical assistance, mobile emergency support, and mortuary operations. Doctors, nurses, and
paramedics provide medical assistance, while private organizations, public safety agencies, and hospitals
sponsor the personnel and resources needed.
Communications
FEMA's communications network team fulfills the government's role in providing communication
resources in disaster areas. These groups provide the lines of communication needed to keep responders in
touch with government and public officials. Communications teams manage the computers, phone lines,
satellite uplinks, and power generators. When needed, teams can erect cell phone towers in cases where
local responders are unable to access telephone systems. Mobile communications systems can also be put
in place to provide airlifted networks of communication throughout a particular region.
The NGOs play an important role in different phases of disaster management and risk reduction, but very
often the efforts of the NGOs do not succeed in achieving desired results due to lack of effective
coordination with other stakeholder groups, especially government machinery, and among the NGOs
themselves. In the absence of proper Guidelines on the role of NGOs in DM, the huge capacity of NGOs,
CSOs and faith-based organisations available in India is not being optimally utilised. The ad hoc systems
of NGO operations also raise certain concerns. We need to bridge the gaps in implementation of disaster
[36]
management framework, to institutionalize the role of NGOs in disaster management and to strengthen the
quality and accountability of NGOs in India.
The provisions of the DM Act 2005, desire the National DM Plan be developed, reviewed and updated
annually. The Plan shall include the measures to be taken for preparedness and capacity building. The
Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005– 2015 adopted by over 168 governments across the world
including India specifies five priorities for action in the holistic framework for reducing disaster risks. The
High Powered Committee (HPC) on DM Plans set up by the GoI in 1999 carried out a nation-wide
consultation process with over 600 NGOs to address the issue of coordination between the governmental
machinery and the NGO sector and also among the NGOs themselves at the national, state and district
levels. HPC recommended a nationwide network of NGOs for coordinated action encompassing all
aspects of disaster management. The DM Act, 2005 provided the legislative back-up to this endeavour by
entrusting the SECs with the responsibility to advise, assist, facilitate and coordinate the activities of
NGOs engaged in DM.
The DM Act 2005 defines the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders and recognises the prime
responsibility of the state to strengthen disaster preparedness. NGOs can assist in identifying the basic
needs of people affected by disasters and ensure that these are met. The communities have to be centre-
staged at the core of DRR and improved disaster preparedness processes.
The role of the humanitarian agencies and NGOs is to complement the government effort in reaching out
to the communities to be better prepared for responding to disasters.
Within their own capacities and mandates, NGOs perform these roles in the interest of vulnerable
communities as per the basic principles of the Humanitarian Charter, the Code of Conduct for the
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief and other
laws and regulations as applicable.
The good practices of international, national and local NGOs provide the opportunity to replicate and
upscale such good practices and explore the possibility of interfacing with government’s flagship
programmes and schemes.
The potential of utilising existing organisational networks like SHGs, youth groups, farmers groups,
village health committees, village education committees, etc for creating greater public awareness on
strengthening disaster preparedness at the local levels can be explored by NGOs very effectively.
[37]
The NGOs can contribute immensely as facilitators to introduce the thematic expertise and good practices
as well as results of action research, policy interventions and knowledge management in the
implementation of government programmes through large social mobilisation exercises.
Embankments are considered important structural measures for managing floods all over the world.
Ideally embankments laid on one or both sides of a river are aimed at containing the rising water from
spilling over to the flood plain so that the settlements and infrastructure on the countryside are not
affected. An embankment, also referred to sometimes as ‘artificial levee’ or a ‘dyke,’ is usually made of
piles of earthen material with a broad base tapered towards the top, laid parallel to the course of a river.
The alignment, spacing and height of embankments depend on the area to which protection is to be
provided, the magnitude of the peak flood discharge expected and the availability of resources
(material: sand, soil, clay; finances; human resources) for construction (Dixit, 2009). Embankments are
designed and constructed to afford a degree of protection against floods of a certain frequency and
intensity or against the maximum recoded floods or against the maximum probable flood depending on the
availability of long-term hydrological data. While designing the embankment, the spacing of the
embankments with respect to the natural river banks is to be properly planned keeping in mind the nature
of meandering of the river.
Embankments, in general, remain effective in containing floods for a certain period of time (life time of
the structure), usually twenty to thirty years in Indian conditions if constructed with proper engineering
design and materials. However, there are instances where embankments, when nurtured properly, have
served an area well beyond this average life period. For example, the 9.5 km long town protection dyke in
Dibrugarh in Assam built in mid nineteen fifties, strengthened later with revetment and accompanied with
a series of spurs (ADB 2009), has still managed to protect the town from the floods of the Brahmaputra
River for last 50 years. Embankments also serve as safe shelters (high land) for flood affected people.
Embankments used as roads are common practices which facilitating transport and communication in rural
areas. They are a cheaper, quicker and easier to implement structure for flood protection.
Embankments, however, also have serious disadvantages and side effects. They are prone to natural
weathering (rain and wind), human pressure and lack of proper and timely maintenance. Embankments
also fail due to seepage, leakage, piping and sand boiling resulting in slumping of soil and these factors
[38]
become more dominating as the embankment grows older (Deka, 2007). Embankments are also
known to be weakened due to denudation grass cover, planting of roots and digging by burrow animals
and rodents. Since embankments are made usually with locally available earthen material, they are almost
unfailingly susceptible to breaches so much so that breaches are an inherent feature of any flood control
embankment, no matter how well they are maintained (Dixit, 2009).
Embankments confine the flow of a river within a narrow space and deprive the river of its natural space
to meander and stabilize. As a result, flow becomes faster and water levels rise within embankments
during the flood season and send high flood peaks to downstream areas. Further, flood discharge intensity
increases and rate of siltation also enhances within the embanked reach of a river causing the river bed to
rise and the channel capacity to be reduced. If an embankment breaches water gushes out with very high
momentum from the river thus causing large floods in adjoining areas. Since these embankments are
mostly made of locally available sandy soil and sand only, large amounts of silt and sand originating from
the river water and the embankments are carried with flood water that get deposited on the flooded land.
Layers of sand have deposited in this way to several feet in vast areas of settlements and farmlands on
river banks in Assam and Bihar. Agriculture is badly affected by sand casting in both these states driving
farmers out of livelihoods. The sandy landscapes in Matmora in Assam bear testimony to land degradation
due to sand casting resulting from embankment induced flooding. In the presence of
embankments flow of water from tributaries and other water bodies get blocked resulting in choking or
closing of outfalls (mouths) of tributaries, impedance of natural drainage and water logging and even
flooding outside the embankments. This result in temporary or permanent degradation of land making it
unfit for agriculture or human habitation.
Opinion of decision and policy makers, experts and general public about the utility, desirability and
efficacy of embankments is varied, often contrasting and polarized. Starting with the first National
Flood Policy of 1953, most of the Government policies and programmes promoted embankments as a
sine qua non for flood management, especially as an immediate flood control measure. The Public Works
Department (Assam) constructed embankments almost with a religious fervour not doing much for their
maintenance or supplementing embankments with non structural options. However, it is argued that
technocrats consider embankments not as a solution but as one of the options of protecting people from
floods (Pandit, 2009) adopted despite the known detrimental impacts. In spite of the demerits by default or
by misgovernance, embankments have been adopted as the main recourse to flood management in the
country. It is important to understand the socioeconomic technical and political interests or compulsions of
[39]
promoting embankments to comprehend the range of governance problems that plague flood management
in the country. It is also partly attributable to the dominance of traditional reductionist engineering
thinking that views floods as a source of unmixed damage and loss ignoring the crucial ecosystem
services rendered by monsoon flows (Bandyopadhyay and Ghosh, 2009) like distribution of soil nutrients
and replenishing fisheries and wetlands.
The general expert opinion is to stop building embankments and to go for a more comprehensive,
innovative, integrated approach to flood management. Some of them recommend a paradigm shift from
conventional flood control regime to flood mitigation to flood risk reduction combining unhindered
drainage, flood adapted structures and building social resilience (Dixit et al. 2007, Dixit 2009). A section
of experts (Iyer, 2008) and general public strongly advocate for allowing the rivers flow freely and open
up basins(Dixit, 2009) encouraging the vulnerable people to learn to live with the rivers and floods and
urging the Government to strengthen adaptive capacity of the people. A section of them recommends even
the demolition of existing embankments. Yet some others consider the network of embankments
developed so far as an asset and recommend strengthening of the same while not going for new
embankments and gradually change for a paradigm shift in flood management with new structural
techniques as well as non structural measures and institutional reforms. The civil society has been
criticized by technocrats and experts serving the Government for spreading fallacies and myths by
technically incorrect comments and analysis about flood management arising out of the ignorance of the
proponents concerned(Pandit, 2009). While the discourses are many and varied, the debate still goes on to
persist between the advocates techno-centric flood management and the civil society, represented mainly
by environmentalists and water management experts with alternative thinking.
Present flood management practices, dominated by structural interventions, have failed to provide
assured and long-term protection to people. Embankments have collapsed frequently with resulting floods
putting these communities’ lives and social order out of gear every year. In the absence of alternatives,
people have depended on embankments as the only means of flood protection. Therefore, much of the
coping and adaptation of the communities have centred round these structures. For example, people take
shelter on embankments along with their movable property and livestock during floods. Many families,
who have lost their land or houses, stay back on the embankments even after floods are over. For some of
them who are not given resettlement and rehabilitation embankments become the only shelter where they
live for years.
[40]
Embankments influence people’s lives and capacity to adapt in both positive and negative ways. When
maintained properly, these structures have protected people from floods and enabled communities to
sustain agricultural activities, even manage to attain agricultural growth and pursue other social,
economic, and cultural activities (such as education, secondary livelihood activities livestock-rearing,
weaving, and others). They have also helped preserve social stability, institutions and traditions by
providing respite from floods. On the other hand, prolonged dependence on embankment has weakened
the communities’ traditional coping and adaptive capacities rendering them vulnerable to floods when
embankments fail. Embankments develop breaches and fail to contain flood water often due to poor
maintenance of flood mitigation infrastructure like the embankments resulting in devastating floods.
Performance of embankments is poor due to technical faults in design, lack of quality control in
construction and repairing, lack of sufficient funds and financial mismanagement on the part of governing
agencies.
Failure of embankments and consequent flood devastations are essentially a governance problem. The
status of flood mitigation structures like embankments and the manner in which their upkeep is governed
has significant influence on how people living in flood prone areas near rivers and embankments respond
to floods to reduce risk and cope with floods. Therefore the governance system associated with flood
management needs to be explored to examine how it influences people’s vulnerability and resilience.
Unfortunately flood management in India as a whole suffers from several shortcomings and is flawed
with inefficiency, lack or absence of proper policy instruments, want of proper execution of policies
and programmes, institutional dysfunction, and lack of political will on the part of the Central and the
Assam Government and their agencies. Institutions created for flood management are plagued with
lack of flexibility, commitment and transparency. Local communities, civil societies and experts outside
the Government regime rarely have any opportunity to participate in the planning and decision making in
the procedures of formal flood governance.
Some people in prefer living close to the embankments in temporary houses rather than living in the
original permanent houses that are away from the embankment and located in the low lying plains, so that
they have a higher ground immediately accessible in case of a flood. This is prominent in those cases
where they apprehend the embankment to breach or collapse at places away from their village but flood
would affect the entire area. They have a sense of their vulnerability increasing in proportion to the
distance of their settlement from the embankment. This practice enhances their coping to some extent
but at the same time makes them more vulnerable by making the embankments weaker. One major
cause of dilapidation and consequent fall of many embankments in the state is the human settlements on or
[41]
close to the dykes. Similarly use of embankments as roads help communities during floods and in remote
areas greatly in accessing resources and support services. On the other hand the constant wear and tear due
to plying of cycles, motorbikes and in some cases four wheelers ruins the embankments making them easy
prey to erosion and flood.
Communities continuously devastated for several years by recurring floods, such as those in several areas
of Dhemaji district, Assam, find it harder to come back to a normal life with their own resources because
floods have led to the loss of their livelihoods, further impoverishment, and breakdown of the
communities’ social cohesion every year. Across the district, one hears stories of a prosperous time when
embankments used to provide security against floods and when these communities were able to cope
better with occasional floods on the strength of their own resources(Das et al. 2009). Protection from
floods provided by the embankments helped communities in the past to make important decisions about
livelihoods. For example, people planned on investing in fisheries, planting certain crops, and sending
their children to schools in affected areas depending on whether or not they expect the embankment to
keep them secure from floods in the next season. It is when embankments and other measures fail to
provide protection against floods and erosion that people are forced to migrate to other areas, but in the
process communities become socially and culturally uprooted and more vulnerable in a situation where
resettlement and rehabilitation are not proper and adequate. Migration to other areas sometimes leads to
conflicts with the government as well as between communities over ownership and occupation of land, an
important resource that can help people cope better in those disaster prone conditions.
On the other hand, people’s growing dependence on embankments has also reduced their
willingness and skill to fight floods. Therefore in some instances communities were found not sufficiently
prepared when embankments breached to trigger large floods. Floods triggered by breaching of
embankments are often more devastating and cause more sand deposition than floods occurring in the
absence of embankments. People in the study areas, for example, suffer physically and incur more losses
when embankments fail and flood the neighbouring areas. Uncertainty surrounding weak embankments
and the fear of floods has immobilised people and restricted them from making important decisions
and actions that would have improved their condition and helped them adapt better. For example,
people are not eager to invest in repairing their stilt houses since a breach in the dike was not repaired
fully; they know that floods will most likely damage their houses again. This indecision makes many
communities more vulnerable to floods in the next season. Development interventions, especially
infrastructure development (such as the construction of educational institutions, hospitals, industries) as
well as housing subsidies are sometimes decided considering whether an area is well protected from
[42]
floods or not. Banks are reluctant to give loans to self-help groups in chronically flood-affected areas in
Assam because they are uncertain whether the seed money will be utilised well in a poverty-stricken area
or whether the loan will be paid back. Since people are overwhelmingly dependent on embankments, they
organise regular vigils along embankments during times of flood, monitoring the status of
vulnerable portions and taking steps on their own to plug breaches as well as volunteering with free labour
during emergencies to help authorities repair the breaches. When flooding is accentuated due to
drainage congestion caused by embankments, they are deliberately cut by the people to drain out the
flood water in another direction to save their own village or farmlands.
Embankments have become an integral part of riverine landscapes, people’s lives and their adaptation
processes despite the fact that people also suffer from embankments in many ways. These are not merely
a techno-economic choice for containing floods temporarily, but also a critical determinant of
development benefits and people’s resilience. This is why it is important to ensure that embankments are
properly made and managed through a forward-looking, progressive and accommodating governance
mechanism. Good governance of flood mitigation structures in general, and of embankments in particular,
will go a long way in providing the much needed respite essential for developing adaptive measures and
adaptive capacity among vulnerable communities.
Flood and erosion emerged as issues for the people as well as the Government of Assam in the aftermath
of the 1950 earthquake. Structural measures, especially embankments emerged as a natural choice for the
planners because people needed these and the Government was also eager to provide for immediate
protection and safety of the people. Lack of financial resources in those initial years of nation building
was also a reason why embankments were preferred over other measures.
But embankments were not supposed to be the only solution prescribed to cure the problem of floods as
seems to be case today. Short and medium term measures were to be mixed with long-term protection like
storage reservoirs and other non structural measures. But other options were given the due prominence in
northeast India. The flood management regime consisting mainly of the technocracy (engineers who plan
technical interventions) and the bureaucracy (planners and administrators who approve the projects)
proved to be monolithic, rigid and insensitive in the subsequent decades. It didn’t change much with time.
Even six decades after the first flood control policy was adopted in 1954, practically the same strategies
are being perpetuated. Embankments have become the symbolic icon of flood management although its
limitations and negative consequences are well known. Corruption has become a part of the governance
[43]
regime in almost all sectors. The structural flood control system slowly transformed into a self
propagating cycle of mismanagement and corruption.
Indigenous knowledge and opinions of local community were isolated from the flood management
process in a planned manner. Communities play a multidimensional role proactively in the flood
governance realm which is though not always effective in bringing desired results. They monitor
embankments for probable breaches during floods, keep a watch on the contractors’ work, assess the
appropriateness of engineer’s designs of structures, keep track of misuse of funds and voice their protests
also from an organizational platform. Community’s activism is not equally distributed all over, but a
function of how long and how much it are suffering, heterogeneity of demographic composition,
education, social stability, economic condition, exposure to outside world etc.
Non structural measure were neither given any importance nor encouraged for a long time. Embankments
were promoted as something inevitable and unavoidable in flood prone areas. Consequently people
became so dependent on embankments that the traditional coping practices lost their importance and grew
weaker. The inherent weakness of the embankments was fully exposed long ago after massive floods
triggered by breaching of embankments devastated many areas in the country as well as in Assam. Yet the
official regime has nothing better to offer to the suffering people who are victims of the false sense of
security that embankments provide.
So great is the influence of the river controlling structures on people’s mind that traditional knowledge has
slowly given way to utilitarian choices. Floods used to bring fine silt with nutrients and make their land
more fertile and after every flood they reaped a bumper harvest. People were knowledgeable about nature
of rivers and floods. They had developed their own practices to cope with rives and floods. After living
with embankment so long, they however, have become too dependent on these structures to live without
them. They have considerably lost the habits and instincts necessary to cope with floods. The indigenous
knowledge is fast vanishing. It is a fact that an alluvial river needs certain space for meandering and
braiding. If entrapped by a pair of embankments on both sides within a narrow space, it starts silting
across channel and hits the banks making embankments collapse and letting out destructive floods.
Floods are more furious when they break out of embankments. Floods now bring only sand and the land is
deposited with piles of sand making agriculture impossible for years to come.
[44]
[45]
CHAPTER 4
[46]
CONCLUSION
To conclude, as a result of prolonged debate and varied discourse over flood management practices of the
country, new ideas and concepts have found some acceptance in the formal systems. But it is a long way
before a complete change can be made in institutions, policies and practices to implement a holistic
framework of flood management. This approach will have to do away with the prevailing paradigm of
controlling to give way to mitigating flood impacts with adaptive and participatory steps to ensure
application of only sensible and flexible river engineering. Along with this empowerment of people to
cope with floods is mandatory. Mainstreaming of adaptation in to the development process will be the
hallmark of such a regime. In the meantime one has live with both embankments and floods.
Mitigation refers to any structural or non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact of
hazards.
Flood Mitigation Measures can be divided into three (3) main areas:
In order to achieve control over the flow and height of the water carried by the river, the channel, flood
plain or watershed must undergo some physical alterations.
These include:
Construction of dams, retention basins or reservoirs on mainstreams or tributaries to store excessive water
and release it gradually after the threat has passed;
Levees or floodwalls can be constructed to confine flood waters to a floodway, thereby reducing flood
damage;
Channel improvements, which include, straightening to remove undesirable bends, deepening and
widening to increase size of waterways; clearing to remove brush, trees and other obstructions; lining with
concrete to increase efficiency.
Watershed Treatment can also be employed to help the soil on slopes to become more absorbent of rainfall
until flood heights have receded. Watershed Treatment involves, crop rotation, construction of terrace,
contour strip cropping; selective planting and reforestation.
[47]
Control Over the Land
These are the lateral boundaries of the floodway where no construction or land filling should be permitted.
This is done to ensure that the flow of water is not obstructed.
Zoning
This is a legal tool used by governments to control development in areas which are or are likely to become
prone to flooding;
Subdivision Regulations
These specify the manner in which land may be divided. Typical provisions show the extent of the flood
plain on maps. Floodway limits or encroachment lines prohibit filling in channels and floodways that
restrict flow and require that each lot contain a building site with an elevation above the flood level.
[48]
Building Codes
These are standards for construction of buildings and other structures and, if enforced, can reduce
damages to buildings in flood-prone areas. Some requirements include, the establishment of basement
elevations and first flood elevations consistent with potential flood levels, ensuring that buildings have
adequate structural strength which would likely withstand water pressure or the high velocity of flowing
water, prohibiting the use of equipment that might be hazardous to life when submerged and installing
proper anchorage to prevent the floatation of buildings.
These include flood proofing, flood forecasting, warning and evacuation systems.
Flood Proofing
This is a combination of structural changes and adjustment to properties which can be used in new or
existing construction. Action includes seepage control, protective coverings, elevation or raising
anchorage and under pinning.
Flood Forecasting
This is reliable, accurate and timely forecasting of floods, coupled with timely evacuation to save lives
and reduce property losses.
Temporary Evacuation
This removes persons and property from the path of flood waters.
Permanent Evacuation
This removes an affected population from areas subject to inundation. This involves the acquisition of
lands and the removal of developments. The acquired lands can be used for agriculture, parks or other
purposes that would not interfere with flood flows or result in material damage.
Flood Insurance
This assists by compensating for flood damage. Insurance rates should realistically reflect the flood risk in
order to avoid encouragement of improper development of flood plains.
[49]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[50]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blaikie, P., Cannon,T., Davis, 1., and Wisner, B., (1994}, At Risk, Natural Hazards, People's
Vulnerabilities and Disasters, Routledge, London.
Bradford, M. and Carmichael, R.S., (2001), Natura·t Disasters, Vol. II, Salem Press Inc.,
California.
Burton, 1., Kates, R.W., White, G.F., (1978J, The Environment as Hazard, 151 edition, Oxford
University Press, New York.
Parasuram S. & Unnikrishanan P.V .. Ed. (2000), India Disasters Report: Towards a Policy
Initiative, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
Roy, S. (2004), Natural Djsaster Management: A Case study of Tornado, Abhijit Publication,
Delhi.
Tapsell, S.M. and Tunstall, S.M. (2000), The Health Effects of Floods: The Easter 1998 Floods in
England, in Parker, D.J. (ed.) (2000), Floods, Routledge, New York.
United Nations, Department of Humanitarian Affairs (1997), Floods: People at Risk, Strategies for
Prevention, UN, Geneva.
Arun Kumar Talwar and Satish Juneja, (2009) Earthquake disaster management, Commonwealth
Publications, New Delhi, 28-49.
Arun Kumar, (2008) Global disaster management, SBS publishers, New Delhi, 16-84, 112-164.
Charveriat (2000). Charveriat, Celine, “Natural Disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean: An
Overview of Risk”, Working Paper No. 434. Washington, D.C. Research Department,
InterAmerican Development Bank.
Chris, Thyagarajan et.al, (2006), DEEDS, Tsunami Psychosocial care programme, reports, Kerala
Disaster Management in India - A Status Report, Ministry of Home Affairs, National Disaster
Management Division, 2004) 2-32, 35-75.
[51]
Global Humanitarian Assistance Update 2004^05, Development Initiatives 2005Designed and
typeset by Discript Ltd, London WC2N 4BN Printed in Scotland by Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow
Goel.S.L. (2010). Disaster Management- -Policy and Administration, Daya Publications, 25-75.
GOI (2004) Disaster Management in India: A Status Report, Natural disaster Management
Division, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, new Delhi. Journal of Integrated
Disaster Risk Management, (IDRiM), Disaster Prevention Research Institute of Kyoto University,
Kyoto, Japan, ISSN: 2185-8322.
Kamal Taori, Disaster Management through Panchayth Raj (2005), Concept Publishing Company,
New Delhi.
Kanwar, Rakesh (2001) Disaster Management, The Administrator,Vol. XLIV, December, pp. 96-
110
Sekar.et.al (2005), Facilitation Manual for Trainers of Trainees in Natural Disasters, NIMHANS,
Bangalore.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN ESCAP), Local
Government in Asia and the Pacific: A Comparative Study, 1993, New Delhi.
Universal Law Publishing, Delhi (2005), The disaster management act, 2005 (53 of 2005),
Universal Law Publishing. New Delhi
World Disasters Report 2009, Focus on early warning, early action: International Federation of
Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Printed by ATAR Roto Presse, Satigny/Vernier,
Switzerland. World Disasters Report, 2012.
[52]
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
This is to certify that Mr. Dinesh Kumar Khatri Student of PGDDM from Indira Gandhi
National Open University, New Delhi was working under my supervision and guidance for
his/her Project work for the Course MPAP-01. His/ Her Project has a title “Disaster
Name: ………………………………………
Designation: ……………………………….
Address: ……………………………………
[53]
DECLARATION
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
(Write the title in Block letters) submitted by me for the partial fulfillment of the PGDDM. to Indira
Gandhi National Open University. (IGNOU), New Delhi is my original work and has not been submitted
earlier to IGNOU or to any other institution for the fulfillment of the requirement for any course of study.
I also declare that no chapter of this manuscript in whole or in part is lifted and incorporated in this report
Place:
Signature Date:
Enrolment No.
Name
Address
[54]
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Received by
[55]
[56]