The Forgotten Victims: Landless Labourers and Informal Workers
The 2025 floods in Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, and Uttarakhand represent one of the most devastating disasters in recent decades, causing large-scale destruction of agriculture, livestock, housing, infrastructure, and livelihoods. Punjab, having declared all districts as flood-affected, estimated immediate losses at over ₹20,000 crore; however, the Central Government sanctioned only ₹1,600 crore in assistance. This disparity provoked criticism from Opposition parties, farmer organizations, and civil society, who labelled the relief “a cruel joke.” The analysis presented in this study highlights the inadequacy of ad-hoc relief measures and the persistence of “package politics” in disaster governance. While climate change has intensified extreme rainfall and cloudburst events, the floods were exacerbated by anthropogenic drivers, including illegal mining, encroachment on riverbeds, unplanned road construction, neglected drainage systems, and poorly managed reservoir releases. The plight of landless agricultural labourers and informal workers, often excluded from compensation frameworks, further underscores the inequities in disaster response. The paper argues for a paradigm shift towards a statutory, science-based disaster finance and management framework, emphasizing basin-level planning, ecological restoration, crop diversification, and inclusive compensation mechanisms to mitigate future vulnerabilities and safeguard food security in northern India.
The floods that swept across Punjab and large tracts of the Himalayan foothills this season are not a localized tragedy to be “managed” with headlines and a token cheque. They exposed a chain of failures — natural and man-made — and left millions reeling: submerged villages, ruined harvests, homes washed away, livestock dead or lost, roads and bridges broken, school buildings damaged and whole communities traumatized. The Prime Minister’s announcement of ₹1,600 crore for Punjab (and ₹1,500 crore for Himachal Pradesh) after an aerial review has been greeted with gratitude by some — but with anger, disbelief and the charge of tokenism by many farmers, opposition leaders and unions who say the figure is wildly inadequate
The scale of the disaster (the facts)
Government and media assessments show a large, multi-dimensional disaster:
Punjab: thousands of villages and nearly all districts were affected; the scale of agricultural damage runs into the hundreds of thousands of hectares (reports cite figures in the range of ~1.7–1.9 lakh hectares (≈4–4.8 lakh acres) and thousands of villages impacted). Rescue operations involved NDRF, Army, BSF, local responders and NGOs.
Uttarakhand, J&K and Himachal: cloudbursts, flash floods and landslides in hill catchments produced sudden torrents, washing away settlements, damaging infrastructure and causing loss of life in mountain valleys — the humanitarian cost here is acute because terrain and isolation make rescue and recovery harder.
Haryana and neighbouring plains too suffered widespread waterlogging and crop damage — hundreds of thousands of acres were registered on state portals for claims.
In short: lives, livelihoods and public assets across a vast, inter-connected basin were struck simultaneously.
The relief maths (and why people are outraged)
Punjab’s elected government and many observers urged a special central package of around ₹20,000 crore to address immediate relief and early reconstruction. The Centre’s announcement of ₹1,600 crore — even if made in good faith and supplemented by earlier central allocations under various schemes — looks tiny by comparison. To be precise, ₹1,600 crore is only 8% of a ₹20,000-crore immediate package demand; even adding the reportedly available ₹12,000 crore “already in the state’s kitty” would bring central support to about ₹13,600 crore, still short of the state’s ₹20,000-crore request. No wonder farmers’ unions, Opposition leaders and many displaced families called the aid a “cruel joke”.
Numbers matter because they determine whether a farmer who saw an almost-ready crop washed away can replant, whether a family that lost its home can be put under a roof, whether markets and supply chains (and therefore food security) can be stabilized. Token amounts don’t buy back sowing seasons or restore soil health in a single monsoon.
Causes: natural extremes amplified by human choices
It’s tempting to treat each flood as “an act of God”. But the science and reporting point to a mix of forces:
1. A more volatile climate — heavy rainfall events and short, intense downpours are increasing in frequency and intensity (a pattern flagged by the IPCC and several regional studies). That raises the baseline risk of floods and cloudbursts across the Himalayan catchments and plains.
2. Upstream triggers in fragile mountains — cloudbursts, landslides, glacial melt and sudden releases from natural or artificial dams in J&K, Uttarakhand and Himachal can send huge pulses downstream within hours. The Himalayan geology is young and sensitive; disturb it, and water does the rest.
3. Anthropogenic amplification — unregulated and illegal mining in river belts, unchecked road construction and poorly engineered “development” in fragile catchments, encroachments on floodplains and riverbeds, weakening of natural drainage, silted siphons and culverts — all these make floods worse and prevent water from moving safely through the landscape. Local reporting and investigations have repeatedly connected mining and construction practices to increased flood damage.
4. Infrastructure and operational choices — reservoir releases from Pong, Bhakra, Ranjit Sagar and other dams, especially when combined with intense rainfall upstream, can greatly intensify downstream inundation. Weak or breached embankments and poorly maintained drainage systems turn a heavy rain event into a catastrophe.
Put simply: climate-driven extremes expose pre-existing vulnerabilities created by governance, planning and choices about land and river use.
Who is invisible in this calculus?
Policy responses tend to focus on titled landowners and visible public assets. But the poorest are often the least visible:
Landless agricultural labourers, informal workers, daily wage earners and tenant cultivators lose immediate purchasing power when fields are flooded; they rarely show up in land-based compensation lists. Their loss is often the hardest to recover from because they lack title, savings or collateral. This is not marginal: the social fabric of rural Punjab and surrounding plains depends heavily on such labour. (Local reports and unions raised this point repeatedly during the relief debate.)
Politics of packages — why the row?
Disagreement over the size and timing of relief is political — and rightly so. Citizens expect the state and Union to act proportionately after a disaster. This is not about party scores; it is about whether disaster assistance is fair, needs-based and rapid. Claims of differential treatment of opposition-ruled states, or of “political optics” driving relief, inflame the situation and erode public trust. Several state leaders and farmer unions publicly described the Centre’s figure as paltry and politically tinged.
What should government actually do? — A practical, non-partisan plan
Short term (first 3 months)
Rapid, transparent cash assistance to affected households (not only landowners). Expand direct transfers to landless labourers and informal workers.
Immediate livelihood kits: fodder & veterinary support, seed & saplings for replanting, repair grants for tubewells & tractors, temporary housing material and water/sanitation relief.
Fast, independent, verifiable damage assessments (girdawari + third-party audits) that publish methodology and outcomes quickly so assistance is timely.
Medium term (6–24 months)
Public works employment to deploy local labour to drainage repairs, embankment strengthening, field restoration — with wages paid transparently.
Subsidized inputs and interest relief for affected farmers, plus targeted insurance payouts (and an easier claims process) for the landless.
Rehabilitate critical roads, bridges and power infrastructure with a climate-resilient design code.
Long term (3–10 years) — structural fixes rooted in science
River basin restoration: de-congest channels, rejuvenate floodplains, legally enforce no-build corridors, and remove illegal encroachments.
Strict control on mining and construction in hill catchments; environmental clearances with real field verification; close monitoring of road and hydro-project impacts. The Supreme Court and investigative agencies must follow up on reported green-norms violations.
Integrated water management: better reservoir operation protocols coordinated across states, improved forecasting, basin-level decision rules and adaptive reservoir management.
Diversify cropping and water policy: move away from mono-season water-intensive cropping on flood-prone plains where feasible; invest in micro-irrigation, crop diversification and soil restoration.
Funding and institutional reform: set up a state-contingent disaster reconstruction fund with transparent triggers and automatic release clauses, and expand social protection so citizens are not reduced to pleading for ad-hoc packages.
These measures are standard in disaster science and are echoed in NDMA and international climate guidance — the point is implementation, transparency and political will.
Questions to ask — and to answer publicly
Why were river channels, drains and siphons allowed to silt up or be encroached despite repeated warnings?
Why is much of the recovery tied to discretionary central allocations rather than automatic, statutory relief mechanisms that kick in with verifiable triggers?
How will the state and Centre ensure the invisible poor — landless labourers and casual workers — receive direct, unconditional help?
A plea — not partisan, but urgent
It is reasonable to be astonished that a calamity described by state officials as costing tens of thousands of crores is met with an immediate package that will not remotely match the scale of the immediate needs on the ground. The Centre must revisit the magnitude and design of relief — for Punjab, for Himachal, J&K and Uttarakhand, and for Haryana and other affected plains — and move from episodic, token aid to a predictable, science-led, rights-based disaster finance regime. Taxpayers’ money is not charity to be dispensed for optics; it is public revenue to secure public life and livelihoods.
Finally: floods are not only a meteorological event. They are a mirror that shows how we have used land, rivers and mountains. If we want fewer catastrophes, we must change policies and choices — fast. The people who planted the fields that feed the nation, who have risked lives on our borders and who keep the rural economy alive are not asking for alms. They are asking for dignity, for fair recompense, for a plan that will keep this from happening again. The state owes them nothing less.
References
1. The Tribune – “Modi announces Rs 1,600 cr for flood-hit Punjab; Opposition, farmers call it ‘cruel joke’” (2025).
2. Hindustan Times – Punjab floods: CM Bhagwant Mann demands Rs 20,000 crore relief package; pending dues of Rs 60,000 crore (2025).
3. The Indian Express – Flood-hit Punjab: Farmers, Opposition reject Rs 1,600 crore relief, call it inadequate (2025).
4. NDTV – Punjab Floods: PM Modi conducts aerial survey in Gurdaspur, meets victims (2025).
5. Times of India – Himachal Pradesh floods: Centre announces Rs 1,500 crore assistance (2025).
6. The Hindu – Climate change and extreme rainfall events in North India: IPCC findings (2024).
7. Down To Earth – Illegal sand mining, encroachments, and their role in North Indian floods (2024).
8. Business Standard – Punjab agriculture and flood damage: 1.9 lakh hectares affected (2025).
9. NDMA (National Disaster Management Authority) – Guidelines on Flood Management (Government of India, 2023).
10. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – Sixth Assessment Report: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (2022).
11. The Wire – Landless labourers in Punjab floods: invisible victims of disaster (2025).
12. Indian Express (Archive) – Drainage neglect, encroachment, and flood vulnerability in Punjab (2023).
13. Supreme Court Observations – Environmental norms violations in Himachal Pradesh hydel and road projects (2024).
14. Press Information Bureau (PIB) – PM CARES for Children, PM Awas Yojana and flood relief initiatives (2025).
No comments:
Post a Comment