|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 1 June 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Disaster preparedness and mitigation : Better late than never by Vimukthi Fernando Disaster. Sri Lanka had just had a taste of 'natural disaster' and its negative effects over the past two weeks. The worst ever flood in 50 years and the earth-slips at its heels, ravaged the country claiming over 250 lives and affecting 162,800 families. The damage to property and costs of rescue and relief operations are yet to be estimated.
Though the country revels in the fact that some major natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornados and tsunamis do not affect the country flood and landslides are not new to Sri Lanka, and especially to Ratnapura district, which was worst hit by the recent floods. Rescue and relief calls were promptly answered at the local level as well as the international level. Time and time again, whenever disaster strikes be it natural or man-made, a landslide, flood or a bomb explosion for Sri Lanka it had always been a case of 'shutting the stable gate, after the horse had bolted'. Rehabilitation measures are being planned out, and the media reports the request of 'international expertise' in disaster preparedness and mitigation. Disaster preparedness and mitigation, was a disaster itself especially for the township of Ratnapura. Though disaster-prone areas were mapped out, mitigation measures detailed and officials trained to avoid or minimize flooding and landslides, the town authorities still allowed housing in the hill slopes, flood plains, 'development' of marshy land and licensed thousands of gem pits. And paid dearly, for their lack of respect for nature and laws of nature. The cost of the damage is yet to be determined.
Yes, the warnings had been there. But, no action taken - many sources including the hospital authorities and the police confirm. "Hazard mapping is completed not only for Ratnapura, but Badulla, Nuwara Eliya, and Kegalle districts which are potential landslide areas" says H.G. S. Ariyaratne, Scientist from the National Building Research Organization (NBRO). Though in the past decade the average rainfall within one day, which activates landslide had been counted at 200 mm, "the present situation is that one could be activated even with 75 -100 mm of rainfall within a day" he says. However, Ratnapura's rainfall of 364 mm on the 17, was less than that which triggered floods in 1996, 390 mm. "There was no severe damage in 1996. We must find out the reasons for the change within the last 7 years. Two research teams from NBRO are already there at the site," says Ariyaratne. The environmentalists seem to be more vociferous condemning the looting of environment and violation of the laws of nature. " The main reason for the catastrophe is the authorities not heeding the warnings of geologists. In 1990, Prof. C. W. Vitanage, of the University of Peradeniya examined fractures on the earth crust and warned some major development efforts in the Samanala Wewa area. But, the changing of environment for development's sake continued. The forest cover protecting the hill slopes, catchment areas and flood plains, disappeared miraculously as small tea plantations, cultivations and houses popped up, specifically, in the Ratnapura, Matara and Galle districts. If the authorities wanted to they could include mitigation measures in the development policies. It is not a case of not having local expertise. In fact we have many an authority and research organization," says a spokesman of the Green Network of Sri Lanka. On top of that is the "Lack of a warning systems and avoiding the responsibility of mitigation measures." The questions remain. Why did the Department of Meteorology fail to adequately warn the local authorities or the public? Why were the life saving boats which were at the Ratnapura Kachcheri (District Secretariat) not in working condition, at the time of need? Why is the National Disaster Management Plan prepared by the Department of Social Services being shelved for so many years, and so on. However, a proper and nationwide disaster management and mitigation plan is imperative. "Though the plans were made and officers trained to implement the plan, disaster management was never given priority. It was just another burden on their shoulders, to be attended to if and when they had time for it. What we need now is a national plan. An emergency plan for disaster management and response, a disaster mitigation plan and a legal framework deeming it mandatory for the local authorities to adhere to disaster preparedness and mitigation measures," says Geethi Karunaratne, Project Director, Sri Lanka Urban Multi-Hazard Disaster Mitigation Project (SLUMDMP). The project was a partner in designing the disaster management plan for the Ratnapura township and provided necessary training for the officials. The barriers to more effective risk reduction are many. And according to the World Disaster Report, 2002 of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, (ICRC) they are: geopolitics or the domination of other items in the human agenda as against natural hazards, professionals trying to mitigate disaster impacts being fragmented along institutional boundaries, risk reduction seen as a separate sector not being mainstreamed into development programming, risk reduction being viewed only as a technical problem without addressing the underlying factors which compel people to live in insecure conditions, lack of resources and invisibility of risk reduction spending. And in Sri Lanka, augmenting the barriers are the attitude of Sri Lankans towards disaster, the causes and warnings being invisible and the people thinking they are invincible. Added to this is the conflicting interest of politicians who engage in risk blind development for mere personal gain. At a time where the world is being ravaged in natural as well as man-made disasters, killing 800,000 affecting over 2 billion and costing over US dollars 629 billion in the 1990s many a country had learned their lessons from different disasters. It is not so much the costly foreign expertise that Sri Lanka needs, but a marshalling of local expertise and resources, into a community-based disaster management approach. And success stories are many and through out the world. Mozambique, India and Bangladesh are examples where community based disaster management brought in a better understanding of living with disasters and effectively deployed low-cost and more appropriate technologies. The time has come for Sri Lankans to open their eyes and minds towards a disaster plan and implement proper disaster management. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
