Need Decentralized Disaster Risk Management System

Inadequate institutional capacity of the government has been considered as one of the major limitations for effective management of rescue and relief operation in the recent Earthquake in Nepal. Owing to the ineffective fund management system, the development partners have shown reservations put their support in the central level disaster dedicated account. Formation and establishment of National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has been felt necessary for smooth implementation of recovery and rehabilitation programs. In fact, only establishing the Authority at central level would not be sufficient, unless legal and dedicated disaster risk management related organizations are formed, and resources and authorities are decentralized from central to local level. This can be possible only when there are elected local government entities to coordinate efforts on the ground.  

Nepal experienced devastating Earthquake on 25^th April 2015 and continues to feel several aftershocks that has resulted in loss of over eight thousand and six hundred people, and damaged a total of 7,69197 private houses until May 21, 2015 (http://drrportal.gov.np/). To ensure timely availability of rescue and relief materials, the government has tried mobilizing all resources through adopting one door policy. In this regard, government has mobilized central and district level relief management committees. In addition, it has tried to strengthen the central level disaster funding mechanism. Although there have been heavy criticism from different quarters, the approach of mobilizing fund from central treasury has received some success.

Nepal has to comply with the principles and programs of Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 as it is party to the convention. As per the convention, Nepal should keep disaster risk management programs at national and local priority. As stipulated in the Framework for Action, the government has promulgated Nepal Disaster Risk Management Strategy (NDRMS) and made provision of forming multi stakeholder disaster risk management committees at national, regional, district and local level. The major spirit of the NDRMS is to decentralize resources and authorities of disaster risk management from central government to local level. In addition, it emphasizes on the need of partnering with CBOs, NGOs and other organizations such as Nepal Red Cross Society while carrying out disaster risk relief and rescue operations at local level. Further, enactment of Local Self Governance Act (LSGA), 1999 gives responsibility of managing disaster to local government.

To develop disaster resilient society, it is necessary to mainstream disaster risk criteria into local development planning process. In order to mainstream disaster preparedness, risk reduction and management as a priority in the  local development planning and budgeting process, Disaster Risk Management Planning Guidelines at district and Local Disaster Risk Management Planning (LDRMP) Guidelines at Village Development Committee and Municipality levels have already been formulated and are being implemented. As envisioned by the LDRMP, Local Disaster Risk Management Committees at Municipality and VDCs are to be formed to plan disaster risk management activities at VDC and Municipality level. Further, according to the Guidelines, to implement the disaster risk management activities, local CBO, NGO and private sectors can also be mobilized.

According to LSGA, 1999 Disaster management fund should be established and mobilized at district level. In this regard, a dedicated account for disaster risk management has been provisioned under District Development Fund of DDC. Further, according to the Act, districts are required to maintain a fixed deposit of at least NRS, 100,000 for use in the event of a disaster. VDCs are also required to maintain some disaster risk management funds at their disposal. Since 2008-2009, municipal bodies have also been required to establish a relief and recovery fund in accordance with an amendment to the LSGA 2007.

Despite having these legal provisions and institutional mechanism, particularly at VDC and Municipality level, these disaster responsive organizations either were not formed or were found almost functionless during the time of recent relief and rescue management. Instead, acknowledging the impartial role, political parties have entrusted Ward Citizen Forum (WCF), for the management of relief materials at local level. There are over 4000 WCF across the countries that were formed under MoFALD through Local Governance and Community Development Program (LGCDP) support. I the present context where there is absence of local elected bodies, WCFs are working as an extended form of local bodies. In a meeting at Rasuwa on 5^th May 2015 where Prime Minister Mr. Shusil Koirala, UML Chairperson Mr. K.P Oli and Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) Chairperson Mr. Pushpa Kamal Dahal participated, district political party representatives applauded effective and neutral role of WCF while distributing relief materials at settlement level.

To create local ownership, based on the Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) reports, it is important to develop early recovery plan under the leadership of local bodies and in consultation with the Earthquake affected population as soon as possible. As monsoon season is at the doorsteps of Nepal, it is wise to get the plan through Ward Citizen Forum and VDC and DDC Councils. It is pertinent to explore and build on the existing policies and programs that support in creating and strengthening early recovery institutions at local levels. An arrangement should be made whereby disaster management communities be engaged in early recovery planning process and mobilize WCF in monitoring and supervision of the early recovery activities at the local level.

Instead of losing more time to create new institution at central level, it is wise to activate the institutions and funds that are being provisioned by existing laws, bylaws and guidelines at the local level. Moreover, adopt the approach of decentralizing disaster management budgets and authorities to local level institutions. In the mean time, to ensure effective implementation of Early Recovery Plan, it is wise to hold interim local election as soon as possible and engage the elected government in disaster risk management. Once elected government is bestowed with the responsibility of disaster risk management at local level, then disaster management shall be inclusive, accountable, participatory, and transparent.

In summary, it is urgent to conduct local election and decentralize the Disaster risk management responsibilities as well as resources to dedicated organizations via local government. In the mean time, it is essential to further strengthen capacity of Ward Citizen Forum and mobilizes them in managing relief and recovery services. Early recovery plan should be designed based on the participation of local bodies so that effective implementation can be ensured. Focusing only on reforming institution at central level would not solve the problem, instead may trigger frustration as it may linger process of service delivery.