Resilient Planning

Bhotekoshi flooding has revealed a serious shortcoming in Nepal’s approach to disaster management. The country is still following the path of reacting to disasters rather than preparing itself for risks that it knows are looming. The current Post-Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) must therefore be used as a platform to change that approach entirely and use it to prepare and respond to future disasters. 

The disaster that occurred on 26 August 2026 had implications for settlement, agriculture, productive resources, infrastructure, and public services. The implications were reported to have occurred in the area of the Bhotekoshi-Trishuli-Narayani River, including the Rasuwa, Nuwakot, Dhading, Gorkha, Chitwan, Tanahun, and Nawalparasi districts. The National Planning Commission and the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority are close to completing the initial stage of PDNA, which focuses on damage assessment, economic and social impacts, and needs of recovery. The survey team has covered about 7,000 affected families.

The information on the ground level is critical. However, the assessment will not make any sense at all if it is left as another report in the shelves of the government offices. The extent of the Bhotekoshi disaster is an important wake-up call, as Nepal's previous disaster costs were estimated at 2 per cent of its GDP annually while the current disaster alone has been estimated to cause destruction equivalent to about 6 per cent of GDP. 

Disaster management, therefore, should not be left out of the loop. It must be incorporated into economic and development planning. Damages to hydropower facilities are especially serious. These cannot be fixed overnight, implying that the impacts will persist far into the future. Losses in power production, jobs and revenue will weigh on the economy.

Planning for the aftermath of the disaster must therefore recognise the distinction between emergency response and longer-term reconstruction. The government has made the right move in trying to get international assistance, which includes climate financing and loss and damage financing. As a country vulnerable to climate-related disasters despite having made a minimal contribution to global emissions, Nepal has a strong claim to more international assistance. 

However, it should not use the lack of international aid as an excuse for poor planning. The government must also put its own funds into the task. The government must also refrain from making the error of conducting repeated studies about the disaster without laying down a consistent basis for its activities.

A joint assessment of the situation, clear data collection and proper delineation of the role of all the levels of governments would help in saving time and efforts. Recovery must also be fair because disasters have different impacts on different groups. Women, poor people and marginalised groups lose more and recover less quickly than other groups. 

The needs of these groups must be taken care of in the recovery plan. The declaration of a “disaster decade” certainly needs serious consideration. It must be backed by dedicated funding, measurable targets, stronger institutions and accountability. The Bhotekoshi flood is supposed to be a turning point from a reactive to a resilient approach. While the government cannot prevent all disasters, it can certainly ensure that all disasters do not turn into catastrophes.

 Published in The Rising Nepal on 7 October 2026.