Rumour Has it: Disaster Management in Pakistan

Nilofer Qazi January 31 2012

In a country of 180 million, in which many live in congested and poorly developed coastlines, cities, villages, mountains and river beds- we have millions of citizens vulnerable-  these vulnerabilities can be mitigated if there is the will. The Risk reduction planning which sensible countries usually adopt , involves either removing  large populations from  these ‘risky’ areas or like in over populated countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan should ‘learn to live with the risk’ and reduce the risks of  loss of life as best they can. Thus for example, in the disaster prone areas, populations and the service delivery mechanisms should be ‘prepared’ and the public servants should be trained and most importantly the local population should be able to manage possible disasters which will reoccur too ensure protection of life at least. 

Disaster management in Pakistan is in a mess. The 2005 earthquake in Pakistan was an opportunity for Pakistan to seriously develop professional disaster management systems.  The EQ05 saw an incredible response by ordinary people, the donors, and to some extent the government functionaries involved, through the rescue, relief, early recovery, and reconstruction phases of any post disaster response.  I mention all these ‘stages’ of post disaster management because like in the other areas of public services, disaster management is also a complicated technical field which requires specific expertise to manage, plan and execute smoothly and coherently  to serve the people it is intended for.

Our State managers on the other hand, seem to think otherwise. In Pakistan Disaster Risk Management DRM constitutes only what the public ‘visibly sees’ (rescue and relief phases) the army jawan rescuing a poor stranded person from the hills of Kashmir or an old person drowning in the flood waters of Sindh. The numerous camps dotted all over the country, managed primarily nongovernmental organizations  the UN and many civil society groups, are also hallmarks of inadequate and persistent absence of systems. This is not DRM. The most difficult and costly part is the restitution of normal life for those affected After they have been rescued and most importantly mitigate reoccurring damage and loss of life.

Notwithstanding government’s lack of  prioritizing DRM, in terms of management for instance DRM platforms have been dominated by the army’s involvement because of the rescue relief phases which necessarily requires their services, it is assumed  civilian chairman’s would not be able to instruct the military when assistance would be required, as a result, the entire framework of focus in these organizations remained limited. Thus instead of the necessary highly technical and trained staff necessary, ill prepared bureaucrats unable to technically understand, plan or develop post rescue DRM systems continue to reign.  Recommendations are abound post EQ05, and studies undertaken by many, government, donors and civil society organizations including Japan, in which DRM is extremely sophisticated, have not been heeded. Pakistan requires a professional organization, which is empowered; financially viable to attract sound professionals who can execute various DRM human resources to ensure millions of Pakistanis living in terrible danger have a chance.

We currently have three federal DRM organizations!  Earthquake Reconstruction Rehabilitation Authority ERRA, the National Disaster Management Authority NDMA and now most recently a Ministry of Disaster Management! All of these institutions have little technical strength in disaster management and are happily completely reliant on the UN and the many foreign Donors to carry the bulk of their functions.  While the donors and the UN provides government the necessary technical expertise it is an unsustainable model which is inefficient and criminally costly. The donors have little incentive to demand the Pakistani government develop a single coherent organization, technically sound with a robust oversight system which can monitor billions of dollars that are necessary to restitute millions affected. The United Nations which provides the ‘stop gap’ capacity for deficiencies across government departments, federal and provincially, has absolutely no incentive to develop sustainable disaster management professionals in government which would replace their services .The government departments find it ‘easier’ to subcontract their responsibilities to ‘consultants’ which provides the necessary technical and delivery expertise to carry out routine services for the general public. This criminal and negligent behavior by the Pakistani state managers is part of the larger Pakistani malaise of laziness and the dependency since the donor raj. The absence of the self reliant ‘ethics’ in Pakistan has resulted in  multiple chaotic and incoherent disaster management systems which has left everyone in the business- confused.

The 18^th amendment has also adds further incoherence to this mess by insisting on devolving the disaster management planning independent from federal oversight. This challenges the logic that disaster management   must be applied strategically across the nation rationally. The 18^th amendment undermines the coherence of national planning and monitoring for a national standard.  In any other sane polity the overlapping, contradictory legislations would be immediately discussed, negotiated and sorted out in light of the critical importance. But not in Pakistan, the parallel systems continue, the donors fund multiple systems, the government and United Nations functionaries continue to  ad hoc ‘ support ‘ ,  learning little from ‘lessons learned’ and repeat the same mistakes . The ‘cost’ is borne by the most vulnerable who have little voice or influence over there elected and unelected ‘disaster management professionals’. The only beneficiaries in this scenario are the ‘hired help’ to help those who have nothing to begin with.

Rumour Has it: What are Donors doing in Pakistan?

Nilofer Qazi January 31 2012

The Capital is overrun by foreign donors trying desperately to spend in a country which is neither poor nor able to absorb the funds.  The politics of Aid requires a lot more attention than given.

The elite of our Capital includes, along with the bureaucrats, politicians, generals, and indenters also the development professionals. What development?  Many of us who can read, speak English, ( Pashto these days is also in demand)  and most importantly, churn out reports, can make a very decent living.

The ‘development’  sector  consists of the following : a donor  agency in line with their country’s  foreign policy, allocates an amount  to ‘assist’ Pakistan, in most probably a ‘social sector area’ because the government of Pakistan has seen fit to allocate less than 5% of its GNP towards the basic necessities’  of its citizens; hence many donors focus on areas of health, education, water and sanitation, public awareness on gender related issues and also disaster management, most recently; Next.   In come the ‘development experts’, both local and international,  who on behalf of the ‘donors’  ‘study’ ‘develop’ ‘implement’ and sometimes ‘monitor’ the various social development programs all over the country . Has it helped Pakistan I ask?  Now if one observes the ‘success’ of these social sector programs over the past 60 years?  You judge.

Whose fault if any is it?  Why do the donors continue to waste there tax payers money in these relatively unsuccessful ventures? Perhaps the funds provided by the international community aren’t sufficient enough to make a dent, given the need?  In addition, the overall social sector budget is unable to absorb these funds towards its intended goals. Both are facts.  

Let’s look at the donors first: Perhaps there is more to the ‘development business’ than meets the eye. Funds are going down the drain relatively, to the results planned to justify the investments.  The donors in Pakistan have tripled their ‘investments’ over the past 3 years in an environment of global recession!   Moreover, Pakistan a UN Reform Pilot country, in which systems of accountability, monitoring, coordination amongst donors/national actors are mandatory, for the very purpose of ensuring that scarce funds towards development SHOW results and are focused towards improving the lives of the poor. There has been a lot of banter and talk about ‘the overhead costs of NGOs, UN and foreign agencies’ which take 40-70% of the funds away from programs. Although this is a little exaggerated, technical expertise costs, and in of itself should be rewarded, but only within a sound and results oriented plan. Thus, if the donors continue to remain uncoordinated, invest in systems, programs which they KNOW   are dysfunctional; this strategy of investment is also tantamount to ‘corruption’ which the government of Pakistan is constantly accused of.

Now the government: why are the governments service delivery mechanisms  unable to absorb and deliver?  The systems in our government departments, the rules of business which govern how government must operate, for example in the procurement areas, the procedures and processes involved are so cumbersome, purchasing  a paper clip would entail  paper work and file movements upwards and downwards that  it would be cheaper and quicker for an individual to go into a market and get it !  In this lock jam environment there is absolutely no incentive or capacity to do anything. Hence the system in of itself ‘encourages’ outsiders such as donor funded consultants to ‘do’ and to ‘purchase’ and as result, practically run functions of government services.  The officials alongside ‘consultants’ achieve little at the expense of the millions in need. The duplication, inefficiency and processes clog delivery systems instead of delivering.

Lets look for a solution then: Pakistan is a public sector dependent country, which means the majority of  souls rely on government; who and how are these services delivered in Pakistan? The government servants which include both the ‘civil service cadres’ and the government officers below grade 12 together constitute the backbone and  the heart of the national system of delivering everything.    Let’s look at our civil service system? What kind of training and hence capacity do our public servants have?  Do they have the wherewithal to handle the volume of the cases they are confronted with, or the capacity to understand the scope of the issues they face; are they trained technically in the sectors they govern? Those who manage the ‘services’ eg DMG officers or senior civil servants have on average a bachelors degree only. Many of the technical areas such as medicine, education, and finance  professionals require a minimum of a phd to be considered an expert. A system which has its policy makers below par cannot possibly attract policy makers or able to deliver.

Why don’t the ‘Friends of Pakistan’ put all their little money, and lobbying muscles’ towards collectively developing a ‘win win ‘strategy for Pakistan and there tax payers. Stop giving money to Pakistan. ONLY provide human resource trainings and technical support within a framework of reform of the entire public service delivery system. The usual mantra of there is no will in this corrupt government and  there are strong  vested interests in the civil service are not strong enough .

Here is the heart of the conundrum? Perhaps the intention is not only the improvement of the lives of the poor ? As long as the ‘development experts’ continue to remain employed both nationally and internationally it supports an economy-an elite economy, in Pakistan and abroad. Some folks are benefiting so that’s good enough I suppose?