2022 has been devastating for thousands of South Africans living within flood prone areas. On 11-13 April 2022, parts of the Kwazulu-Natal and Eastern Cape provinces experienced severe flooding and landslides caused by heavy rainfall. The floods were catastrophic, with over 300mm of rainfall experienced within a 24-hour period. Rushing floodwater collapsed riverbanks and hillsides. Residents’ homes were completely washed away with all their belongings. The rain and floods came at night when many were sleeping, making the event even more deadly. Over 440 people were killed, over 40 000 were displaced, and over 12 000 homes were destroyed by the floods. Infrastructure including roads, health centres and more than 600 schools was also damaged.
In response to the disaster, the Government of South Africa began coordinating the provision of humanitarian assistance to those most affected and set up temporary accommodation sites for families that had been displaced by the disaster. Relief efforts have been supported by various organisations, including the South African Red Cross Society, which mobilised volunteers to search for the missing and bring others to safety, and to support in the provision food, psychosocial support, and the restoration of family links. The impact of the disaster was most severe in areas with informal settlements that were built close to rivers, as well as rural areas on steep hillsides with little or no infrastructure to protect them from the consequences of extreme weather conditions. As a result, the devastating floods have highlighted the material threat posed by extreme weather and climate change.
Three months after the floods, it is time to reflect on how DRR and the resilience of communities most vulnerable to disasters and extreme weather events in South Africa can be strengthened. A starting point may be the review of the country’s national disaster risk management (DRM) legal and policy framework. Laws and policies form the foundation of DRM: they prescribe who does what, when and how, and underpin all disaster risk reduction, preparedness, and response activities. Strengthening legal preparedness is therefore crucial to building a country’s overall DRM capacity and is particularly relevant in South Africa to address the impacts of climate change and unplanned urban growth.
The Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002, as amended (the DMA), provides the legislative framework for DRM in South Africa. The DMA was developed to provide for an integrated and coordinated disaster management policy that focuses on preventing and reducing disaster risk through the efforts of all spheres of government, civil society, and the private sector. The DMA guided the response to the floods -a provincial state of disaster was declared under the DMA in Kwa-Zulu Natal on 13 April, and a national state of disaster was declared on 18 April, to enable the mobilisation of more resources, capabilities, and technical expertise in providing relief, recovery, and rehabilitation to affected communities. The DMA is complemented by the Policy Framework for DRM (the Policy Framework) which was developed in 2005 to better implement the DMA.
Communities are a central focus of the DMA and Policy Framework requiring, for example, the identification of communities most vulnerable to hazards in the process of disaster management planning, community consultation in undertaking risk assessments, and the dissemination of disaster related information to at-risk communities. Nevertheless, there are areas of the DMA which can be strengthened to enhance the preparedness of communities and to ensure that communities undertake activities to minimise risks to both natural and man-made disasters. For example, the DMA’s provisions on risk assessments could be strengthened by mandating the inclusion of information received through risk mapping and vulnerability assessments prepared by civil society organisations which specialise in DRM and are grounded within communities. Such an approach could lessen the gap created by disaster risk scientists and the users of the information: at-risk communities. Another key area is early warning systems and processes: while the DMA and Policy Framework provide for the development of early warning standards and encourage the issuing of these warnings in a timely and effective manner ensuring dissemination to the most vulnerable communities, prioritised inclusion and engagement of representatives in disaster prone areas who may not have regular access to the media or internet should be considered. This approach could increase the effectiveness of early warnings in informal settlements.
Although the DMA and Policy Framework provide a robust DRM legal and policy framework, gaps have also been identified with respect to coordination and DRM funding at the different levels of government, which may impede the effective implementation of the DMA. For example, the DMA’s distinction between the functions of classifying and declaring disasters, and the assignment of responsibility for these functions to the National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC) and political head of the relevant sphere of government, respectively, appears to generate confusion in practice, right at the outset of a disaster. With regards to funding, although provisions on funding are included in the DMA and the Policy Framework, the funding mechanisms in the DMA are focussed on emergency response and post disaster recovery, and not DRR and disaster preparedness activities. This results in a lack of resources for DRR and preparedness activities, especially at the local level. For example, although detailed DRM planning is mandated at national, provincial, and municipal levels, this has proven challenging to implement in practice for institutions which do not have the resources to comply, such as under-capacitated local municipalities.
Although comprehensive DRM laws and policies alone cannot ensure the effective implementation of DRM activities on the ground, they are certainly the starting point to promoting implementation. Setting clear roles and responsibilities for DRM actors across all levels and sectors of government as well as other DRM stakeholders, including National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, NGOs, CSOs, communities and the private sector (and ensuring that all actors are aware of their roles and responsibilities); and developing multi-sector coordination mechanisms for DRR, preparedness and response and recovery (and mandating that these bodies convene regularly) can enhance the coordination and implementation of activities in practice. This can include, for example, ensuring the establishment of DRR focal points in all ministries of government. The allocation of roles and responsibilities to both state and non-state disaster management actors is crucial to ensuring cohesive and coordinated disaster preparedness and response efforts in which all of society have roles to play. For example, in the context of the April floods, the local government focused on the task of rebuilding and repairing damaged infrastructure; the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) and Disaster Management Centres deployed teams from both national and provincial centres who collaborated with SARCS and other stakeholders to conduct assessments, the South African Defence Force was deployed to provide aerial support, and the Department of Social Development, SASSA, and the COGTA provided psychosocial services and food vouchers.
Linked to this, adopting an all-of-society approach to DRM and prioritising stakeholder engagement, including vulnerable groups, in DRM decision making processes, planning and activities (including the development of DRM laws and policies) can promote the buy-in of all stakeholders and enhance implementation. Setting out clear reporting mechanisms, as well as establishing legal and administrative sanctions for public officials, individuals, and businesses for a gross failure to fulfil their duties are also important to promoting implementation. Finally, DRM financing is vital to the effective implementation of DRM laws and policies. Regardless of how comprehensive and detailed legislation may be, weaknesses in funding mechanisms can significantly curtail its implementation. Laws and policies should make provision for the development of effective financing mechanisms for DRR, preparedness and response (including anticipatory action), and recovery at all levels, to ensure that DRM actors are equipped with the necessary resources to fulfil their roles and responsibilities effectively.
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that DRM laws do not exist within a vacuum -a wide range of sectoral laws are equally important to manage and reduce disaster risks in communities. These include laws relating to, for example, climate change adaptation, environmental management and land use planning and development. Therefore, it is important for DRR to also be integrated within laws and policies within these sectors, and for linkages to be made between these laws and policies and DRM laws and policies, to ensure a cohesive framework for managing disaster risks.
The recent floods experienced by the provinces of Kwa-Zulu Natal and the Eastern Cape have had devastating consequences for the affected communities. It is vital to reflect and identify lessons learned and practical changes that can be made to both reduce the disaster risks that vulnerable communities face, as well as enhance their preparedness and resilience to disasters. The importance of legal preparedness has been highlighted by the recent floods, the impacts of climate change which are being increasingly felt, and of course, the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst South Africa has developed a strong legal framework for DRM which clearly indicates that DRR and disaster preparedness are priorities for the country, almost two decades have passed since the DMA came into effect and the Policy Framework was developed, and seven years have passed since the DMA underwent amendments. This, combined with the gaps and implementation challenges identified above, indicates that it may be an opportune time to review and enhance the DRM legal and policy framework in the country. This review could build on the strong foundation already laid by the DMA and aim to strengthen its implementation in areas of DRR, disaster preparedness, response, and recovery, particularly, at provincial and local level, to ensure no one is left behind in DRM activities.