Limits to privatised relief in Chennai

On December 1, the city of Chennai experienced rains of an unprecedented magnitude. Combined with poor urban planning and a creaking civic infrastructure, Chennai experienced a disaster that was more manmade than an act of nature.

As expected, the State deployed the army as well as the NDRF to rescue people. However, citizens’ groups played a significant role, using social media to coordinate several of these efforts.

Almost a week after the rains ceased, most roads are dry, yet citizens’ groups continue their frenzied activity along with a set of new groups that are gathering aid from across the world.

The rains on December 1 were the third heavy downpour in the season. The first two sets of rains had seen flooding, but not on this scale, leading the State government to ignore all warnings.

While the media continues to call the event a “perfect storm” and attributes it to the prevalent El Nino effect, the reality is better summarised in the words of the late geographer Neil Smith, who said, “There is no such thing as a natural disaster.”

The rains were but a cause that revealed the cracks in the system. As always, the people who bear the brunt of such disasters are the vulnerable, and the poorest in society. Their vulnerabilities are, of course, accentuated as a result of poor state policy and human action.

The one thing we can hold the State responsible for is the lack of preparedness and its poor warning systems.

Disasters have two aspects to them. The immediate, shorter-term aspect is response, which begins as soon as an event is detected.

The response of residents in Chennai and in other cities definitely deserves a pat on the back. Seldom has one seen this level of concerted efforts being taken to help another fellow human, and this clearly made up for lack of preparedness of the State.

As stories continue to pour in, one realises the extent to which every single person in the city helped another, either by providing food, water, shelter or medical services, rescuing people from a flooded area, or passing on a message through Twitter, Facebook or WhatsApp. Response, however, stops as soon as the cause of the disaster stops. In the present case, with waters receding from most parts of the city within a few days, and with the restoration of power and telecommunications to a large extent, the period of response should have ceased or segued into the longer-term recovery plan mode.

This is an important shift because in economic terms, the recovery period is when local jobs are created due to the rebuilding of physical assets, cleaning and renovation. The continued involvement of aid agencies and citizens’ groups, extending the response period, can be a huge detriment to economic recovery. The phenomenon is so widely observed that Naomi Klein calls it “disaster capitalism”.

Before we praise the continued involvement of local aid groups and citizens, one has to ask what the role of the state is, particularly in a democracy.

It is all too tempting to ask private groups to take over the recovery planning because it seems more efficient. Given the numbers that need to be tackled and its responsibility towards each and every citizen, the state cannot abdicate this responsibility. Having provided the support needed immediately after the floods, it is now time for citizens’ groups to step aside and demand answers from the state on long-term plans to prevent a similar event, or plans for emergency services should this recur.

This is easier said than done. With social media and instant ‘heroism’, it is hard to step aside and give up fame and the instant dose of ‘good karma’.

However, the more private groups are involved, the harder it is to track whether the flow of funds has been put to good work. The lack of planning and existence of multiple groups also results in chaotic rebuilding efforts and short-term measures, with no accountability or oversight, sometimes even blocking the longer-term plans to recovery.

During a due diligence visit to the districts of Nagapattinam and Cuddalore almost five years after the tsunami hit the coast of Tamilnadu, I came across several NGOs that had sprung up in response to the aid that flowed in. Several of these used manual accounting systems and were small organisations that now act as ‘partners’ with the State government for multiple programmes such as organising health camps, conducting surveys, and so on. These, however, tend to lack any accountability in operations or utilisation of funds.

In the aftermath of disasters, such rapid growth of aid-funded organisations is commonplace and results in organisations that compete with each other for resources, duplicate efforts and often get in the way of long-term recovery. Excessive aid that is directed towards providing clothes or food over an extended period of time also slows the recovery of local economies since it does little beyond maintaining people in relief camps by providing free food and clothes. The government would do far better to equip the displaced with ways to get back to their normal lives by rebuilding infrastructure than allow private groups to continue their charity and use that as a front for recovery.

While weak state structures might have necessitated the citizens of Chennai to rise to the occasion, it is now time to step back and begin a concerted plan to strengthen these structures and increase accountability. The energy and enthusiasm of local citizens is far better utilised in exercising their democratic right and asking questions of the state regarding governance. We have to stop behaving like bleeding heart liberals, for that is a luxury we can ill afford.

The writer is a consultant on financial inclusion