Disaster Management In Nigeria: An Appraisal Of NEMA

Project and Seminar material for Public Administration

Disaster Management In Nigeria: An Appraisal Of NEMA


Abstract


1. The upsurge of disastrous events; both natural and man induced in the 1990s and 2000s in Nigeria has indeed been worrisome. Despite the establishment of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) in 1999, the management of emergencies and disasters has left much to be desired. Although Nigeria has developed some measures of capacity in disaster response, the country still remains vulnerable to disasters due to a combination of factors, which include technological, environmental, political and climatic change combined with increasing population density. The situation calls for a critical assessment for a more effective, holistic and proactive approach to disaster management in Nigeria. It is against this background that this work set out to appraise the performance of NEMA in managing disasters and emergencies in Nigeria.

2. The study, which is a historical research, relies on both primary and secondary sources of data using mainly unstructured interviews, consultations and case studies as its methods of data collection. Thus, the relevant civil organisations and other major players and stakeholders in the management of disasters were the main sources of primary data. The secondary sources of data were from reputable publications, journals, magazines, reports and the Internet. The data collected were analysed qualitatively leading to some findings and recommendations.

3. The work found out that although NEMA, which is the central coordinating body, has a workable blue print and policies for managing disaster, the body is however faced with a lot of constraints. The major challenge have been that many of the states of the federation do not have the necessary structures such as the Local Government Emergency Agency (LGEA) to enable them prepare adequately for disasters in order to mitigate the effect. These are being compounded by inadequate early warning systems and poor integrated planning amongst others. Above all, the Disaster Response Units (DRU) and Operational Directorates (ODs) are constrained by the lack of expertise to effectively carry out their functions in conformity with the National Disaster Response Plan (NDRP).

4. Based on the research findings, the study highlighted the prospects of effective disaster management, which led to some recommendations. The recommendations included improved information management, need for the early warning systems, integrated planning and coordination among others. This is in order to take disaster management beyond distribution of relief to a more innovative and scientific approach in Nigeria.


Chapter One


Introduction

1.1 Background of the Study

Security is a fundamental prerequisite for a stable social order and for sustainable human development. Security is a priority in all human societies and is the responsibility of governments to ensure peace and security within the society. Tragedies on the other hand, occur naturally or are man made and have the ability to disrupt peace and security within a society. Tragedies have been with man for as long as civilization on earth. Its occurrence has been attributed to numerous factors. Tragedies are usually associated with destructive occurrences that leave man with a great sense of loss and despair. Any such incidence that leaves man helpless could be referred to as an emergency. Civil strife, sabotage, outbreak of epidemics and aggression are some of the crises that constitute national emergencies.

An emergency can sometimes turn out to be a disaster or crisis requiring urgent action to mitigate the effect of such an occurrence. Disaster, hazard, crisis, catastrophe and upheaval are commonly used to describe such an occurrence. Disaster means, “greater or sudden misfortune”. It is an event or hazard; natural or man-made, sudden and or progressive, which impacts with such severity that leaves a community helpless and miserable.

Examples of man-made disasters includes the chemical explosion at Union Carbide Corporation Bhopal India in December 1984 that left 4,000 people dead with many still suffering from the attendant health related problems.5 Similarly, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings of the Second World War in Japan, speaks volumes. An instance of natural disasters is the Hurricane Katrina that hit Florida, the United States of American (USA) on 25 August 2005.6 Several other examples of disasters are abound with monumental loss of lives and properties.

Unfortunately, disasters tend to occur more frequently world wide due to increase vulnerability of societies to hazards with the attendant losses when compared to few decades ago. This assertion is supported by the United Nation disaster estimates, which noted that between 1994 and 2003 at least 2.5 billion people were killed by the effects of disasters worldwide, while about 478,000 people were killed by the effects of natural disasters such as hurricane, earthquakes and floods.

Africa has equally had a series of painful experiences of disaster in the past. In August 1986, the volcanic eruption in the highland of Western Cameroon led to the death of about 1,700 people while 330 sheep, 300 herds of cattle and thousands of other livestock were also lost.8 Drought as a hazard is no stranger to South Africa, nor is the threat of wild fires, flash floods or other disasters. Examples of these is Laingburg flash floods in 1995 where 173 lives were lost.9 Nigeria has had its own share of national disasters which has impacted negatively on the socio-economic well-being of the nation. These include the Ogunpa flood of 1977 in Dugbe Ibadan city. Over 400 houses and hundreds of lives were lost in the flood incidents between 1960 and 1963 alone.

There are also many man-induced disasters in Nigeria. These include the C-130 plane crash in 1992, the EAS crash of 2002 Belleview and Sosoliso air crashes of 2005 where more than 200 people lost their lives with many more maimed.11 There was also the Jos Terminus Main Market inferno of 12 February 2002 which destroyed over 56 million Naira worth of goods. Another man made disaster was the Ikeja Military Cantonment Ammunition Transit Depot (ATD) explosion on 27 January 2002 resulting in massive damage to the cantonment with about 1,100 people reportedly killed.

Another worrisome dimension to man made disasters in Nigeria is that of internal crises. Some of these crises manifest in the form of ethno-religious crises or the quest for resource control. These are threats that have occurred recently and are becoming frequent. Results of these crises are massive loss of human lives and properties in large proportions tantamount to man made disasters.

Despite an increasing toll from disasters in terms of human suffering, death, infrastructural damage, loss of income and the attendant psychological trauma, feasibility measures to mitigate disasters are not adopted by most developing countries. Presently, there are no internationally agreed standards for disaster management institutions, structure and legislation, there are however some agreements on codes. Some of such are building codes and transportation of dangerous materials. These are however, far from Inter-continental. Although the United Nations (UN) and Non-Governmental Organisation (NGOs) have made significant efforts at promoting and formulating strategies for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and response, many countries including Nigeria are become increasingly vulnerable. Some examples quoted could have been avoided through better planning, control measures, warning systems, community development and preparedness.

Disasters and emergencies impact negatively on sustainable national development. Frequent occurrences of disasters and the need to manage them more effectively have made most developed and some developing nations like South Africa to adopt proactive measure by forecasting hazard prone areas in order to prevent or mitigate the impact of disasters. In this regard, central coordinating machineries were put in place to manage disasters.

In Nigeria, there are many stakeholders in the management of emergencies and disasters. These include the Nigerian Armed Forces, Nigeria Police (NP), Federal Road Maintenance Agency (FERMA), Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC), and the Nigeria Fire Service (NFS). Others are the National Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), the Red Cross and United Nations High Commission for Refuges (UNHCR) and some individuals among others. However, the extent to which the various activities of these stakeholders are harmonised coordinated and synchronised in situations of national emergencies and disasters leaves much to be desired.

The foregoing challenges necessitated the establishment of the National Emergency Relief Agency (NERA) in 1976 before Decree No 12 of 1999 amended by Act No 5 of 1999 with a broadened scope transformed it to the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). NEMA was among other things, designated to effectively coordinate the management of emergencies and disaster efforts of all the stakeholders. However, despite the NEMA’s establishment, response to disaster in Nigeria has fallen short of expectation. This has largely been attributed to inadequate capacity building and integration of effort. Moreover, NEMA’s intervention has continued to be focused largely on relief efforts as against proactive approaches.

The recurrent and increasing occurrences of disasters have presented the critical need for a more effective, holistic and proactive approach to disaster management in Nigeria. This approach ought to be community based and federally funded and coordinated. There is the need therefore, to focus on disaster risks and the vulnerability of communities with emphasis on multi-levels and multi-dimensional coordination. More collaboration between all stakeholders and the private sectors particularly the insurance companies would also be necessary as mitigation measures. The disaster plan ought to include preparation for terrorist threat, which poses new and hitherto unimaginable concern in Nigeria. This is therefore the motivation for this research.


1.2 Statement of the Problem

NEMA whose supervisory role is the management of emergencies in Nigeria has been incapable of fulfilling its statutory mandate. One can posit therefore that this organization lays more emphasis on the distribution of relief materials than a holistic, scientific and pragmatic management of emergencies and disasters. The concern is whether the present state of disaster management in Nigeria is capable of achieving its statutory role on human security through disaster reduction. For instance, in the aviation sector, the ADC aircraft that crashed on 10 June 1996 in Ejirin village in Ogun State took almost 24hrs to be located. Similarly, the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) plane that crashed in Vandeikya, Benue State on 17 September 2006 took some hours before official assistance and response could be provided.

Other recurring problems to disaster management in Nigeria include lack of proper maintenance of infrastructure and equipment, lack of adequate early warning system and inadequate funding. Others are; lack of proper mobilisation of the citizenry to manage disaster and improper vulnerability assessment of likely disaster areas including inadequate and ineffective legal and regulatory framework. Improper planning and uncoordinated management of risk-reduction strategies, and haphazard relief and recovery processes result in loss of lives, problems of feeding, sanitation, housing, medical and undesirable social vices. It is against this background that this research seeks answers to the following questions.

  1. What is disaster management?
  2. What types of disasters and emergencies are prevalent in Nigeria?
  3. What is Nigeria’s approach to disaster management?
  4. What are the challenges to disaster management in Nigeria?
  5. What are the prospects for efficient disaster management in Nigeria?

1.3 Objective of the Study

The main objective of the study is to discuss disaster management in Nigeria and the role played by NEMA in this regard, with a view to highlighting the prospects of an efficient disaster management system in Nigeria. The specific objectives are to:

  1. Define disaster management.
  2. Examine the types of disasters and emergencies prevalent in Nigeria.
  3. Analyse Nigeria’s approach to disaster management.
  4. Highlight the challenges to disaster management in Nigeria.
  5. Outline the prospects for enhancing disaster management in Nigeria.

1.4 Significance of the Study

The study will be beneficial to the Nigerian Government in the formulation of effective policies in furtherance of an enhanced emergency preparedness and disaster management in the country. It will specifically benefit National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) and its implementation of risk reduction measures and strategies for disaster management. The Nigerian Armed Forces, NP, FERMA, FRSC, NFS and NSCDC will also benefit from the research in their respective roles in disaster management. It will also serve the Red Cross Society, local and international organisations involved in disaster management.

This is to enable the foregoing organisations appreciate the importance of the subject matter and understand the difficulties encountered in managing disasters as well as the suggesting the benefits of an enhanced disaster management in Nigeria. It will also serve the general public and add to the existing body of knowledge as well as a future reference material for further research on the topic.


1.5 Scope of the Study

The scope of the study will highlight the roles of NEMA in national disasters issues and discuss the managerial effectiveness of NEMA officials in tackling disasters. It will also ascertain if NEMA has any constraints in the course of performing its roles and identify the government and non-governmental organisations contributions to national disaster problems in Nigeria.

The study highlighted hazard profiles in Nigeria over the last 3 decades but only critically analysed the most prevalent disasters within 2000 and 2010. This period was chosen because it was a period that recorded frequent cases of disasters in Nigeria. It also marked a period when the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) embarked on a systematic approach for the management of national emergencies and disasters. Activities of the security agencies in managing disasters will be discussed. However, NEMA is the central focus in this study.


1.6 Limitations

The limitation of this study was the problem of poor record keeping in some government agencies. NEMA and its related bodies did not properly document some past disaster management operations in the country. Statistical and other relevant information on previous disasters in Nigeria were limited. Some newspapers statistics were also found to be inaccurate with the reports sensationally inclined.

These limitations did not however, degrade the quality of the research, as past works and literature were available at Armed Forces Command and Staff College (AFCSC), Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Federal Polytechnic Kaduna, NEMA and the Internet among others. It was also difficult to get responses from some relevant government agencies because of administrative procedures and the fact that the researcher was not able to travel to other parts of the country other than Abuja and Kwara State on an environmental study tour. This would have afforded a wider research with other deductions.


1.7 The Research Questions

The research questions are as follows:

  1. What factors give rise to increase in number of disasters in Nigeria within the last decade?
  2. Why are the effects on the populace still very severe despite government efforts?
  3. What is the role of NEMA in the management of national disasters?
  4. Has NEMA adequately performed its statuary role of managing disasters within the nation?
  5. Are there any constraints encountered by NEMA in the management of national disaster?
  6. How can NEMA be assisted to achieve its goals and objectives?

Complete Material Available


Project Material Download

5,000 5000

The Complete Material Will Be Sent to You in Just 2 Steps

Quick & Simple…


Step One Purchase

Make Payment (Through Transfer) of ₦5,000 to Any of the Account Below

Access Bank PlcAcc No: 0811003731
Samphina Academy
Current Account
Zenith BankAcc No: 1225513212
Samphina Academy
Current Account

Or CLICK HERE To Pay With Debit Card


FOR STUDENTS OUTSIDE NIGERIA
CLICK HERE To Purchase Material ($15)
FOR GHANIAN STUDENTS
Make Payment of 120 GHS to 0553978005 | Douglas Cloud Osabutey | MTN MoMo

Step Two Purchase

Send the Following Details on WhatsApp ( 08143831497) After Payment

  1. Payment Details

  2. TOPIC: Disaster Management In Nigeria: An Appraisal Of NEMA

The Complete Material Will Be Sent To You On WhatsApp After Receiving Your Details
T & C Apply


  Contact Our Help Desk


Need a Different Topic? Perform a Quick Search



List of Related Works

Click on Any Topic to Preview the Content


Conclusion


This study has reviewed, analyzed, and compared the legal and institutional frameworks of DM systems in India and Nigeria. It initially provides a comprehensive introduction of Indian and Nigerian DM systems, including the countries’ disaster profiles and the current DM policies and institutional frameworks, then compares them from different points of view to find the similarities, differences, common challenges, and lessons learned. Both countries have enacted national disaster legislation and established their DM systems with several common features. DM systems in both countries follow a similar pattern revolving around a multi-level structure from the federal level to the state and finally the local/district level. While the federal governments play a leading role in formulating, enforcing and coordinating policies, guidelines, and plans for DM at the national level, the state governments are responsible for enacting their DM laws under the national legislation. Also, in both countries, the primary responsibility for managing DM activities lies with state governments and the federal governments have a supportive and supplementary role when a disaster overwhelms a state’s capacity. Despite these similarities, the DM systems in India and Nigeria differ significantly in terms of legislation and institutions. 83 Regarding the integration and prioritization of DRR efforts in their DM laws and regulations, we found that the Indian Act is more in line with the international frameworks governing DM policies such as the HFA and SFDRR. It provides a more comprehensive approach to DM, tending to concentrate on both reactive and proactive approaches as well as DRR measures. However, the NEMA Act is more focused on disaster response and recovery than preparation and mitigation and failed to mirror the language and priorities of the HFA and SFDRR. Considering the system of financing DM, the Indian Act provides separate funds for response and mitigation at all levels of governance, but the sources of funding are not clear at the state and district levels, which causes problems in mobilizing, managing, and spending such funds at different levels. In Nigeria, the federal government mainly provides the financial resources for DM and the two other tiers of the government contribute almost nothing towards funding the NEMA. This is because the NEMA Act has failed to make provisions to compel the lower levels of governance to make financial contributions towards DM in the country. From the community participation point of view, we found that India by enacting the Indian Law and other policies and guidelines such as the NDMP, NPMD, and Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction of India, recognizes the pivotal roles and contributions of community groups, youth organizations or other voluntary agencies in all DM activities. As a result, under the supervision and guidance of the NDMA, SDMAs, and LDMAs, local communities in India are more actively participating in DM activities. Whereas, the NEMA Act does not clearly make provisions for recognizing and acknowledging the importance of community participation and its role in DM programs. Also, while the NDMF recognizes different community structures 84 like CBOs, FBOs, and NGOs and empowers them to engage in disaster-related activities, it has failed to plainly address their duties and responsibilities. Because of this little acknowledgment, community engagement in Nigeria is still low, and people tend to stay inactive when calamities strike. Our review and analysis also found that in Nigeria, the coordination and collaboration mechanisms among the implementing agencies in activities and programs related to DM are still largely on paper, rather than reality. However, India by developing better legal and institutional frameworks creates more effective coordination and collaboration mechanisms between and amongst various ministries and government departments, and other stakeholders across all DM activities. While both countries suffered from destructive man-made disasters in the recent past, our research found that their DM systems are mainly focused on natural disasters and paid less attention to adequate preventive and regulatory measures to handle the risks and impacts of man-made hazards. In terms of capacity building for DM, we found that despite the efforts and progress being made by the NIDM and NEMA, both due to administrative and financial issues have not achieved complete success in supporting and strengthening the state-level training institutes. Based on the challenges identified and discussed, and in order to change the current situation and move towards more effective DM systems in India and Nigeria, the following recommendations are presented: 85 1- The NEMA Act should be amended to ensure that DRR measures are highly prioritized and integrated across all stakeholders (governmental, nonorganization, private sectors, community based, etc.) involved in DM. 2- Due to the importance of timely availability and release of sufficient funds to effectively handle disasters, both countries need to clearly identify assured sources of funding at all levels of governance, particularly at the state and local/district levels. 3- To reduce people’s vulnerabilities and losses as a result of disasters, Nigeria should proactively involve local communities in disaster management activities by clearly defining their roles and responsibilities and providing them with adequate funding. 4- To avoid duplication of roles and waste of resources, Nigeria should take steps to improve the collaboration and coordination mechanisms between the tiers of government. In this regard, the NEMA Act should empower the NEMA to compel the SEMAs and LEMAs to do their activities in a coordinating and cooperative manner. 5- Both countries need to pay more attention to man-made hazards and strengthen their legislation and institutional frameworks by with all-hazards approach that covers man-made disasters as well. 6- In both countries, adequate financial resources should be provided to agencies at all three levels of governance, especially at the state and local/district levels for capacity building activities like manpower training, knowledge development, and continuous development of institutional and policy mechanisms.

samphina.academy

Samphina Academy

Samphina Academy is an Online Educational Resource Center that is aimed at providing students with quality information and materials to aid them in succeeding in their academic pursuit.