Disaster management in India has shifted from a relief-centric to a prevention-centric approach, yet implementation gaps persist. Examine the adequacy of India's disaster preparedn

GS2 Government Policies
Disaster management in India has shifted from a relief-centric to a prevention-centric approach, yet implementation gaps persist. Examine the adequacy of India's disaster preparedness framework with reference to man-made disasters.

Examine

  • 10 marks
  • 8 min
  • 150 words
  • Medium

The Hindu

Read article →

Disaster Preparedness in India: Shift to Prevention

  • The Disaster Management Act, 2005 created NDMA/SDMAs, moving from relief to risk reduction and preparedness.
  • Alignment with the Sendai Framework (2015–30) emphasises prevention, mitigation, and resilience.

Adequacy: What Holds

  • Institutional Capacity NDRF/SDRF enable specialised, rapid response; improved inter-agency coordination enhances rescue outcomes.
  • Early Warning & Preparedness Systems for heatwaves/cyclones have reduced mortality (NDMA guidelines; state HAPs), indicating preventive gains.
  • Legal Backing Statutory plans and funds (NDRF/SDRF) provide a structured preparedness ecosystem (2nd ARC on Crisis Management).

Implementation Gaps: Man-Made Disasters

  • Regulatory Vacuum & Conflict of Interest Weak/absent binding SOPs in sectors like transport, tourism, and urban services; instances where operator = regulator dilute accountability.
  • Safety Compliance Failures Lapses such as non-availability of safety gear, ignored weather advisories, and poor crew training reflect enforcement deficits.
  • Last-Mile Preparedness Golden hour losses due to delayed professional response; reliance on untrained first responders exposes gaps in local capacity.
  • Fragmented Oversight Multiple authorities with overlapping mandates (municipal, transport, police) lead to diffusion of responsibility (CAG audits on safety compliance).

Analysis

  • While the framework is adequate for natural disasters with clear protocols, man-made disasters remain under-regulated, where prevention depends on compliance, not just capacity.

Conclusion

  • India’s framework is prevention-centric in design but uneven in execution.
  • Strengthening requires sector-specific binding SOPs, independent safety audits, clear liability norms, and community-level preparedness, ensuring prevention extends effectively to man-made risks.