The Flood Lessons

This monsoon, northern India has witnessed exceptionally heavy rainfall, notably in Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Punjab, and Delhi. Rivers like the Yamuna soared past danger marks, prompting mass evacuations in Delhi and elsewhere.

The twin cloudbursts near Chisoti in Kishtwar district on August 14 triggered catastrophic flash floods, claiming over 65 lives. Experts attribute these intensified rain events to climate change because warmer air holds more moisture, fueling severe, rapid downpours in mountainous regions. But that is not all. Urban expansion into floodplains, encroachment on wetlands (like Dal, Wular lakes), siltation, and pollution, undermines the land’s natural ability to absorb rainfall and regulate flooding. Deforestation in areas like Kupwara, Ramban, and Anantnag is causing soil instability and frequent landslides.

Reduced winter snowfall and glacial retreat with (less than 30% glacier mass in places like Kolahoi and Thajiwas) are altering hydrology and increasing runoff volume. Disaster preparedness remains fragmented. Despite IMD warnings, flood forecasting and early action systems are inadequate in J&K. There is limited radar coverage, no flood forecasting stations, and the State Disaster Response Force (SDRF) lacks basic gear like boats and jackets at the time of disasters. Kashmir’s flood frequency roughly once in every six years is among the highest in the region. Yet, underinvestment in flood-control infrastructure remains evident. Though an amount of over ₹2,000 crore was sanctioned in post-2014 flood packages, phase-II of implementation is far from execution.

India’s recent floods are a tragic clash between a changing climate and outdated planning. Cloudbursts, glacial melt, and heavy monsoons are unavoidable; how society responds is not. The repeated disasters are avoidable and must be met with systemic change.

A shift from reactive relief approach to proactive risk reduction approach is imperative if we are to spare future generations from repeated devastation. The complexity and urgency of contemporary sustainability issues often demand specialized knowledge that goes beyond administrative skills. Sustainable development demands informed decisions rooted in scientific understanding, technological innovation, and long-term vision. Yet, in India, policy-making continues to be dominated by generalists who have limited involvement with domain experts such as technocrats, scientists, and researchers.

To ensure robust, effective, and future-oriented policy-making, it is imperative to make these experts active participants in governance. For example, formulating climate policies requires a deep understanding of environmental science, renewable energy technologies, biodiversity, ecological economics and lately AI. Similarly, tackling issues like air pollution, water scarcity, or agricultural distress involves scientific analysis and innovative solutions that cannot be adequately addressed by administrators alone.

The over-reliance on generalist administrators often leads to short-term, populist policies that lack scientific backing. On the other hand, technocrats and researchers bring in data-driven insights and analytical skills that are crucial for crafting policies that are not just politically feasible but also scientifically sound.

Countries like Germany, South Korea, and Singapore have set strong examples by embedding experts in policy-making. Germany’s Energiewende (energy transition) was crafted with significant input from environmental scientists and engineers. Germans prefer to call their ruler as chancellor rather than governor or minister.

In South Korea, the integration of technocrats in digital infrastructure development helped the country become a global tech leader. So does UK maintain a robust infrastructure for scientific input into governance. Central to this is the Government Office for Science, led by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA). This body advises the Prime Minister and Cabinet across all departments to ensure science-informed decision-making. In emergencies, the UK convenes a Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), whose members include leading scientists who provide real-time counsel during crises—such as pandemics, eruptions, or floods.

The Netherlands established the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR) in 1972 as an independent think tank composed of social scientists, economists, and legal scholars. Its mission: to offer a multidisciplinary perspective on future societal challenges and advise long-term policymaking. The WRR’s evidence-based work has been instrumental in guiding national development strategies.

The U.S. has the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), comprising scientists, technologists, and industry leaders to advise on scientific and innovation policy.

Japan uses its Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (CSTI) in a similar capacity.

All these countries have embedded Chief Scientific Advisers (CSAs) within their government systems to foster evidence-based policymaking .

Australia has made strides in bridging science and policy through programs like the 2012 Blueprint for Reform, which encouraged deeper collaboration between universities and government bodies to inform sustainable and strategic policies. Sri Lanka offers a notable case where scientific institutions influenced judicial outcomes. Reports by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation on the Eppawala phosphate project played a pivotal role in judicial annulment of a mining agreement.

By institutionalizing expert voices—whether through formal structures or innovative collaboration—these nations demonstrate how sustainable development policy gains depth, credibility, and effectiveness. These examples show how expert-led governance can lead to long-term, sustainable outcomes.

In a rapidly evolving, technologically-driven, and complex policy environment, serious questions are being raised about whether the current national level examination pattern truly selects for the kind of talent and mindset India needs today. The UPSC exam for instance remains an endurance test with a heavy emphasis on rote memorization, generalist understanding, and essay-style responses that favor verbose articulation over analytical clarity. The choice of optional subjects further skews the process, allowing candidates from non-scientific backgrounds to bypass any serious engagement with STEM-related content.

This has led many to argue that it remains a “rot” of colonial thinking ( a British system’s residue): emphasizing authority over accountability, generalism over specialization, and tradition over innovation. These features may have served empire-building but they do little for solving modern India’s challenges in areas like climate change, cybersecurity, sustainability, and public welfare.

Scientific aptitude defined by a capacity for logical reasoning, data interpretation, analytical problem-solving, and evidence-based thinking is foundational to effective governance in the 21st century. Whether it is formulating climate policy, handling pandemics, digitizing public services, or regulating AI, administrators must make decisions grounded in science, not instinct or ideology.

The generalist-versus-specialist debate has long plagued Indian administration. While the flexibility of generalist officers is useful in some areas, it has become increasingly clear that many complex policy issues cannot be effectively managed without domain expertise. Yet, our pattern continues to prize generalists who can master the archaic exam pattern and write long essays on a wide range of topics, rather than specialists who can solve real-world problems with technical insight.

This discourages scientists, engineers, and domain experts from entering public service, as the system promotes conformity over creativity.

Moreover good management and maintenance come with a good will and not necessarily with educational qualification. In that context, Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad’s administration in the period of (1953–1963) in Jammu and Kashmir is often praised by many commoners, especially older generations, due to a combination of socio-economic improvements and welfare measures. Bakshi’s government heavily focused on building infrastructure such as roads, bridges, flood channels, hospitals, and schools across the region. Urban centers like Srinagar and Jammu saw modernization and expansion. His efforts helped connect remote regions, improving trade and mobility. He is an illustrious example to show practical ways of doing good to those who qualify many good exams, read fiction and write poetry and are clueless at the time of crisis.

The popular phrase “History is a series of victories of the scientific man over the romantic man” suggests that humanity’s progress is primarily driven by rational, empirical, and strategic approaches rather than by subjective, and idealistic viewpoints. We always need more pilots than poets, more engineers than executives, more riders than writers, more scientists than statesmen and more skills than sophistications.

Therefore the immediate and essential reform required in India’s Governance Framework is to encourage more lateral entry of technocrats into senior administrative positions, particularly in science, technology, environment, and disaster management.

Meanwhile amidst flood like situations, we the residents of old pockets of Srinagar continue living in bits and dying in doses.

Dr. Qudsia Gani, Assistant Professor and Head, Dept. of Physics, Govt. Degree College, Pattan