Que. Critically examine the challenges faced by states in accessing disaster relief funds from the central government. What measures can be introduced to ensure timely and adequate financial support during disasters? 

प्रश्न: केन्द्र सरकार से आपदा राहत निधि प्राप्त करने में राज्यों के सामने आने वाली चुनौतियों का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए। आपदाओं के दौरान समय पर और पर्याप्त वित्तीय सहायता सुनिश्चित करने के लिए क्या उपाय किए जा सकते हैं?

Introduction

The Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, introduced on August 1, 2024, in the Lok Sabha, has sparked renewed debate over disaster management centralization in India. While the Bill aims to enhance the efficiency of disaster management authorities, it has also raised significant concerns about the accessibility and efficacy of disaster relief funds. The amendment’s emphasis on centralization may exacerbate existing challenges, complicating the process of accessing timely and adequate financial support during disasters.

Challenges Faced by States in Accessing Disaster Relief Funds

(i) Excessive Central Control: One of the primary challenges posed by the amendment Bill is the increased centralization of disaster management. By providing statutory status to existing central committees, the Bill consolidates decision-making power at the federal level. This centralization complicates the chain of action during disasters, leading to delays in fund allocation and decision-making. States, which are on the front lines of disaster response, often find themselves constrained by a bureaucratic bottleneck, slowing down the relief process.

(ii) Dilution of the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF): The Bill proposes changes to the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) that could dilute its purpose. Previously, the NDRF had specific guidelines for utilization, ensuring that funds were allocated effectively during severe disasters. The Bill’s removal of these guidelines introduces uncertainty in fund utilization and accessibility. This dilution can lead to delays and complications in accessing funds, especially in the aftermath of large-scale disasters when timely support is crucial for effective response and recovery.

(iii) Lack of Financial Devolution: Another significant issue is the lack of financial devolution accompanying the Bill’s provisions. While the creation of Urban Disaster Management Authorities is a positive step, it does not guarantee the necessary financial resources to empower these authorities. Without adequate financial devolution, these bodies may struggle to execute their responsibilities effectively, leading to inefficiencies in disaster management and relief efforts. This lack of fiscal autonomy hampers the ability of states to respond swiftly and adequately to disasters.

(iv) Regional Variability and Gradation: The Bill’s rigid classification system for disaster events fails to account for regional variability. Disasters vary significantly in their impact depending on geographic and climatic conditions. For instance, what constitutes a heatwave in one region might be a normal temperature range in another. The Act’s inflexible categorization does not accommodate these regional differences, potentially leading to misclassification and inadequate responses. This oversight complicates the allocation of resources and affects the timeliness of relief efforts.

Measures to Ensure Timely and Adequate Financial Support

(i) Empowering State Governments: To mitigate the challenges posed by centralization, it is crucial to empower state governments with greater autonomy in disaster management. This can be achieved by establishing state-level disaster response funds with streamlined approval processes. By reducing the need for excessive central approvals, states can access and utilize funds more swiftly, enhancing their ability to respond effectively to emergencies.

(ii) Adaptive and Flexible Criteria: The criteria for disaster classification and fund allocation should be made more adaptive to reflect regional variations and the specific impact of disasters. Implementing flexible criteria will ensure that the classification of disaster events considers local contexts, leading to more accurate assessments and appropriate resource allocation. This approach will help address the disparities in disaster impact across different regions and improve the overall effectiveness of disaster relief efforts.

(iii) Simplified and Transparent Procedures: Streamlining the procedures for accessing disaster relief funds is essential for improving efficiency. Reducing bureaucratic layers and enhancing transparency in fund allocation processes will facilitate quicker and more effective responses. Simplified procedures will minimize delays and ensure that funds reach the affected areas promptly, enabling a more agile and responsive disaster management system.

(iv) Regular Consultations and Feedback Mechanisms: Establishing regular consultations between central and state governments, along with effective feedback mechanisms, can address states’ concerns and improve the disaster management framework. By fostering open communication and collaboration, these consultations can help identify and resolve issues related to fund access and utilization. Feedback mechanisms will also allow for continuous improvement of the disaster management system, ensuring that it remains responsive to the needs of states and affected communities.

Conclusion

Addressing the challenges of accessing disaster relief funds requires a multifaceted approach. By empowering state governments, adopting adaptive criteria, simplifying procedures, and fostering regular consultations, India can enhance its disaster management framework. These measures will not only improve the timeliness and adequacy of financial support during disasters but also strengthen the nation’s overall resilience to future emergencies.