Climate Disasters In India: Extreme Events, Risks And Resilience

Session Report
Madhesh Raj P R

Climate disasters are risks closely linked to climatic conditions and climate change. These include extreme events such as heatwaves, floods, cyclones, and droughts, as well as other climate hazards. Although such events may have natural causes, the extent of their impact is strongly influenced by human exposure, vulnerability, environmental degradation, development patterns, and the capacity of institutions and communities to respond. The need to understand such climatic disasters has increased as extreme events increasingly affect livelihoods, infrastructure, public health, agriculture, ecosystems, and even economic activity.

For a country like India, with its large and diverse population and varying levels of vulnerability across different regions, understanding these risks is particularly important. Managing disasters is, hence, not limited to relief and recovery after a calamity. The risks need to be identified in advance to protect vulnerable communities and strengthen preparedness by building resilience.

The Day 5 session addressed these issues by examining the relationship between climate change, extreme events, disaster risk, development and resilience. Ms Moumita hosted the session, and the speaker was Prof Anil K Gupta, Professor & Chief Executive, Integrated Centre for Adaptation to Climate Change, Disaster Risk Reduction and Sustainability ICARS, IIT Roorkee. The session was on examining the changing nature of climate-related disasters in India and the necessity to move from a reactive approach to disaster management. It connected climate change with development planning, environmental degradation, vulnerability, disaster risk reduction and resilience.

Extreme Events of Climate Change and Losses

The speaker began by discussing how extreme events and climate change are increasingly significant in shaping disaster risks. Disaster cannot be understood through hazard alone, since its consequences depend highly on the vulnerability and exposure of communities and ecosystems. Such events could result in damage to infrastructure, disruption of several livelihoods, severe economic losses, and broader social consequences.

The importance of “loss” and “damage” in international climate negotiations in the context of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP27, COP28, and COP29) was then discussed. Loss and damage was presented as an important dimension of climate action, alongside adaptation and risk reduction. The session also noted the difficulty of accurately assessing disaster losses, particularly when impacts extend beyond immediately visible physical damage.

Adaptation, Disaster Risk Reduction and Development Planning

The session mainly focused on the relationship between climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction and development. The speaker emphasised that adaptation cannot be the responsibility of a single department or institution. Rather, climate risks cut across sectors such as agriculture, water, health, housing, forests, rural development, land use, and energy. The session also discussed about the National Action Plan on Climate Change and several sectoral policies and planning mechanisms.

The broader point was that climate considerations needed to be incorporated into development planning rather than being treated as a separate issue. The speaker noted that development can both reduce and increase future disaster risks in infrastructure. Tools to support risk-informed planning were also highlighted, including Environmental Impact Assessment, Strategic Environmental Assessment, Disaster Risk Assessment, risk-based developmental planning, cost-benefit analysis, risk auditing and ESG considerations. These tools can help identify potential risks before projects are implemented.

Vulnerability, Ecosystems and Nature-Based Solutions

Another central theme of discussion was the relationship between environmental degradation and vulnerability. The speaker discussed how changes in land use, natural resources, infrastructure, and ecosystems can increase disaster risk. Vulnerability was also presented as being influenced by technological and behavioural factors, meaning that disaster risk is shaped by human decisions as much as by environmental conditions.

A creative recommendation by the speaker was nature-based solutions and ecosystem-based approaches towards addressing climate risks. The example of wetlands in East Delhi illustrated how ecosystems can contribute to disaster resilience. Wetlands provide a wide range of ecosystem services, including regulating, provisioning, supporting, and cultural services. Simultaneously, these ecosystems face pressure from competing human activities. This idea demonstrates that environmental conservation and disaster risk reduction need not be treated as separate objectives. Protecting ecosystems can itself form part of a broader resilience strategy.

Building Integrated Systemic Resilience

The session also keenly focused on the need to develop integrated approaches to build resilience. The speaker discussed the limitations of treating disaster management, climate adaptation, development and sustainability as separate policy areas. Disasters can produce cascading effects across multiple sectors and thus require effective coordination between governmental departments and the local communities. Some approaches to building resilience were discussed in the session.

They were climate and risk financing, resilience scoreboards for cities, climate knowledge networks, science and technology, innovation, business continuity management and integrated planning. The role of different sectors was also taken into consideration, with reference to the Covid-19 experience in the context of understanding interconnected and cascading risks. The session stressed the importance of linking disaster management plans with adaptation plans, health action plans and departmental development plans. The speaker believed this would allow risks to be identified across sectors rather than dealt with only after a disaster occurs.

Conclusion

Overall, the session provided a broad understanding of climate disasters by placing them within the larger context of development. One key observation from this session was that a disaster is not simply the result of an extreme natural event; rather, the scale of its impact is determined by exposure, vulnerability, environmental conditions, planning decisions and institutional preparedness. Thus, the discussion pointed out the shift from reactive response to proactive risk reduction and resilience-building in disaster management.’

The session demonstrated how disasters can be studied beyond immediate relief and response. Further, it highlighted the importance of examining the underlying causes of vulnerability and how development choices can influence future risks. The session, in summary, described resilience as a continuous process involving governments, communities, scientific institutions, ecosystems and the private sector, instead of narrowing it down to the time period immediately after the disaster.

Acknowledgement

This report was written by Madhesh Raj P R, pursuing an M.A. in Political Science at MCC and serving as a research intern at the Impact and Policy Research Institute (IMPRI), New Delhi.