Integrated Drought Management

Abstract

Historically, the response to drought by governments and other organizations globally has been reactive – poorly coordinated, ineffective, and untimely. This approach is commonly referred to as crisis management. This model leads to the provision of relief or assistance in a post-drought setting to those most affected. I have typically illustrated this post-impact response with the “hydro-illogical cycle”. In the early stages of drought development, the initial awareness of drought conditions is followed by concern and panic as drought conditions intensify. Oftentimes, the need for a more proactive approach to drought management that includes the adoption of risk reduction actions in advance of the next drought is considered by policy makers. However, when normal rainfall eventually returns, the government's plan to develop a proactive drought management strategy in order to be better prepared for the next drought often is discarded, i.e., a return to the apathy stage of the cycle. Associated with the crisis management approach is the lack of recognition that drought is a normal part of the climate. To prepare for drought's inevitable recurrence, drought-prone countries should develop a national drought policy and associated preparedness and mitigation plans aimed at risk reduction. This step will require a greater upfront investment in drought planning and preparedness, but the cost of action to reduce the risk associated with future drought episodes is far less than the costs associated with inaction.

Topics & Concepts