Contents

Abbreviations 1
Part I 6
1 Introduction 7
1.1 Need for the Plan 7
1.2 Hon’ble Chief Minister’s Vision for Disaster Management 7
1.3 Main Pillars of the State Disaster Management Plan 7
1.4 Legal Framework 7
1.4.1 DM Act 2005 7
1.4.2 Uttar Pradesh DM Act 2005 7
1.5 Scope of SDMP 8
1.6 Objectives of the Plan 8
1.7 Time Frames: Short, Medium and Long-Term 8
1.8 Multi-Hazard Approach 9
1.9 Stakeholders of the State Disaster Management Plan 9
1.10 Implementation of State Disaster Management Plan 9
2 DRR Coherence and Mutual Reinforcement of Three Post-2015 Global Frameworks and its
Integration with UP SDMP 10
2.1 Background 10
2.2 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) 10
2.2.1 SDMP and SFDRR 10
2.3 Sustainable Development Goals and Disaster Resilience 12
2.4 Paris Agreement on Climate Change: COP21 and DRR 12
2.5 Prime Minister’s Ten-Point Agenda and UPSDMP 14
3 State Profile 16
3.1 Background 16
3.2 Administrative Structure 17
3.3 Demographic Profile 17
3.4 Social Profile 18
3.5 Economic Profile 19
3.5.1 Main Occupation 19
3.5.2 Income Patterns 19
3.6 Sectors of the Economy 19
4 Institutional Framework 21
4.1 Disaster Management: Basic Institutional Framework 21
4.2 State Disaster Management Authority 21
4.3 Roles and Responsibilities of UPSDMA 22
4.4 State Executive Committee 22
4.5 State Relief Commissioner 23
 4.6 State Disaster Response Force 23
4.7 State Emergency Operations Centre 23
4.8 District Disaster Management Authority 23
5 Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 25
5.1 Uttar Pradesh at a Glance 25
5.2 Hazard Profile of the State 26
5.2.1 Brief Overview of Major Hazards 26
5.3 Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Analysis (HRVA) 26
5.3.1 Flood 28
• Flood History in the State of Uttar Pradesh (1973 to 2019) 30
• Flood-affected Regions of Uttar Pradesh 32
• Discharge from Perennial Rivers 35
• Dam/Barrage Flow Discharge 36
• Siltation 36
• Flood Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (HRVCA) 37
5.3.2 Drought 39
• History of Drought in Uttar Pradesh 40
• Severity of Drought in Uttar Pradesh 42
• Bundelkhand: Overview of Monsoons in 2018 Resulting in Drought 43
• Socio-Economic Impact of Drought in Uttar Pradesh 44
• Drought Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 44
5.3.3 Earthquake 46
• Earthquake Zones in Uttar Pradesh 46
• List of Districts of Uttar Pradesh in Earthquake Seismic Zones II to IV 47
• History of Earthquakes in Uttar Pradesh, Including Bordering States 48
• Earthquake Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 49
5.3.4 Fire 51
• Major Fire Incidents in Uttar Pradesh 51
• Fire Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 51
5.3.5 Lightning and Thunderstorm 53
• Lightning Vulnerability in Uttar Pradesh 53
• Western Uttar Pradesh 54
• Central Uttar Pradesh 55
• North-Eastern Uttar Pradesh 55
• South-Eastern Uttar Pradesh 57
• Lightning Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 58
5.3.6 Hailstorm 59
• History of Hailstorms in Uttar Pradesh 59
• Hailstorm Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 59
5.3.7 Industrial and Chemical Disasters 60
• Industrial and Chemical Disasters Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 63
5.3.8 Stampede 65
• History of Stampedes in the State 65
• Vulnerabilities in Stampede 65
5.3.9 Epidemics 66
• History of Epidemics in Uttar Pradesh (2004 to 2017) 66
• Epidemics Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 73
• COVID-19 74
5.3.10 Snakebite 74
• District-wise Deaths due to Snakebite 74
• Snakebite Hazard, Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment 77
5.4 Social Vulnerability 79
5.5 Vulnerability Analysis Using SDGs Indicators from 2020 NITI India Index 80
•NITI Aayog’s Indicators for Analysing Structural Vulnerability 83
5.6 Environment Vulnerability 84
5.7 Capacity Analysis 85
5.7.1 Incident Management: State Emergency Operation Centre (SEOC) 85
5.7.2 Disaster Response: 112 UP, 102 UP Fire, UP SDRF, UP PAC 85
5.7.3 Information Management and Data Analysis – Remote Sensing Application Centres 86
5.7.4 Early Warning and Dissemination – FMISC, Indian Meteorological Department (IMD)
Lucknow, CWC 86
5.7.5 Equipment Inventory: Fire, DDMA, Tehsil, 86
Abbreviations

ACS - Additional Chief Secretary

ADM - Additional District Magistrate
AES - Acute Encephalitis Syndrome
ANM - Auxiliary Nurse Midwife
ASDM - Aerial Services and Digital Mapping
ASHA - Accredited Social Health Activist
AQI - Air Quality Index
AWC - Anganwadi Centre
AWW - Anganwadi Worker
BMTPC - Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council
BSA - Basic Shiksha Adhikari
BSNL - Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
CAD - Computer-Aided Design
CAGR - Compounded Annual Growth Rate
CBO - Community Based Organization
CBRN - Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear
CCA - Climate Change Action
CHC - Community Health Centre
COP21 - 21st Conference of the Parties/Paris Climate Conference
CRIDA - Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture
CSR - Corporate Social Responsibility
CWC - Central Water Commission
DCPC - District Child Protection Committee
DCPU - District Child Protection Unit
DDMA - District Disaster Management Authority
DGFASLI - Directorate General, Factory Advice and Labour Institutes
DIET - District Institute of Education and Training
DISH - Directorate of Industrial Safety and Health
DM - Disaster Management
DMP - Disaster Management Plan
DDMP - District Disaster Management Plan
DoMHFW - Department of Medical Health and Family Welfare

1
DOT - Department of Telecommunications
DRM - Disaster Risk Management
DRR - Disaster Risk Reduction
DWCD - Department of Women and Child Development
EMR - Emergency Medical Response
EOC - Emergency Operation Centres
ESF - Emergency Support Functions
EWS - Early Warning System
F&ES - Fire And Emergency Services
FAP - Flood Action Plan
FCI - Food Corporation of India
FMISC - Flood Management Information System Centre
GACC - Global Agreement on Climate Change
GIS - Geographic Information System
GOI - Government of India
GP - Gram Panchayat
GSDP - Gross State Domestic Product
GSI - Geological Survey of India
HAZCHEM - Hazardous Chemical (Codes)
HAZMAT - Hazardous Materials
HRIMS - Human Resource Information and Management System
HRVA - Hazard Risk Vulnerability Analysis
HRVCA - Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis
HSD - High Speed Diesel
IC - Incident Commander
ICAR-IRVI - ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute
ICDS - Integrated Child Development Services
IDRN - India Disaster Resources Network
IEC - Information, Education and Communication
IMD - Indian Meteorological Department
IRS - Incident Response System
IRT - Incident Response Team
ISR - Institute of Seismological Research

2
JE - Japanese Encephalitis
JJ - Juvenile Justice
KVK - Krishi Vigyan Kendra
LCO - Labour Commissioner Organization
LDO - Low Dropout
LPG - Liquid Petroleum Gas
LYD - Lower Yamuna Division
MAH - Major Accident Hazardous
MGD - Middle Ganga Division
MHA - Ministry of Home Affairs
MIS - Management Information System
MPLADS - Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme
MSIHC - Manufacture, Storage, and Import of Hazardous Chemicals
MTO - Mineral Turpentine Oil
NADCP - National Animal Disease Control Programme
NDMA - National Disaster Management Authority
NDMP - National Disaster Management Plan
NDRF - National Disaster Response Force
NDRF - National Disaster Response Fund
NDRMF - National Disaster Risk Management Fund
NERS - National Emergency Response System
NFS - National Food Security Act
NGO - Non-Governmental Organization
NIDM - National Institute of Disaster Management
NPDM - National Policy on Disaster Management
NRSC - National Remote Sensing Centre
NSS - National Service Scheme
NYKS - Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan
ODR - Owner-Driven Reconstruction
PDNA - Post-Disaster Need Assessment
PHC - Primary Health Centre
PMAY - Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana
PMFBY - Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana

3
PMJAY - Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana
PMMVY - Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana
PPP - Public-Private Partnership
PRI - Panchayati Raj Institution
PSU - Public Sector Undertaking
PWD - Persons with Disability
R&D - Research and Development
RCO - Relief Commissioner’s Office
ROIP - Radio Over Internet Protocol
RRT - Rapid Response Team
RSAC - Remote Sensing Application Centre
SCERT - State Council of Educational Research and Training
SDM - Sub-Divisional Magistrate
SCPS - State Child Protection Society
SDGs - Sustainable Development Goals
SDMA - State Disaster Management Authority
SDMP - State Disaster Management Plan
SDRF - State Disaster Response Force
SDRF - State Disaster Response Fund
SDRMF - State Disaster Risk Management Fund
SEC - State Executive Committee
SEOC - State Emergency Operation Centre
SEZ - Special Economic Zone
SFDRR - Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
SHG - Self-Help Group
SIDCC - State Integrated Disaster Control Centre
SIHFW - State Institute of Health and Family Welfare
SKO - Superior Kerosene Oil
SMEs - Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
SOP - Standard Operating Procedure
STAA - Sub Thematic Areas for Action
SUDA - State Urban Development Authority
TAA - Thematic Areas for Action

4
UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
UHI - Urban Heat Island
ULB - Urban Local Bodies
UPPCB - Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board
UPPCL - Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited
UPID - Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department
UPSDMA - Uttar Pradesh State Disaster Management Authority
UPSTDC - Uttar Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation
UYD - Upper Yamuna Division
VHF - Very High Frequency
VSAT - Very Small Aperture Terminal

5
Part I

6
 1 Introduction

1.1 Need for the Plan

Section 23 of the Disaster Management Act 2005 (DM Act)1 mandates every State to develop a
State Disaster Management Plan and update it annually. The State Disaster Management Plan
(SDMP) is a strategic document developed based on features of the National Disaster
Management Plan (NDMP 2019) and provides the framework and guidelines for departmental
action plans and the District Disaster Management Plans (DDMPs).

1.2 Hon’ble Chief Minister’s Vision for Disaster Management

“To build a disaster resilient State within the framework of Prime

Minister’s 10 Point Agenda for Disaster Risk Reduction and post-
2015 Global Frameworks on Disaster Management and to empower
communities for disaster prevention, mitigation, preparedness and
response”.

1.3 Main Pillars of the State Disaster Management Plan

The five pillars of SDMP are aligned to the NDMP 2019. The five pillars are:
I. Conforming to the national legal mandate – the DM Act 2005 and the National Policy on
Disaster Management (NPDM) 2009;
II. Participating proactively to realize the global goals as per agreements to which India is a
signatory – Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR), Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and Paris Agreement on Climate Change – consistent with
the international consensus for achieving mutual reinforcement and coherence of these
frameworks;
III. Prime Minister’s Ten-Point Agenda for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) articulating
contemporary national priorities;
IV. Social inclusion as a ubiquitous and cross-cutting principle; and
V. Mainstreaming DRR as an integral feature.

1.4 Legal Framework

Under Section 23 (1) of the DM Act 20052 – it is mandatory for every State to have a SDMP. The
SDMP is supposed to be a guiding document for all State-level departments with respect to their
roles and responsibilities across all phases of Disaster Management (DM). According to Section

1 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 10). Retrieved from
[Link]
2 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 10). Retrieved from

[Link]
7
23 (2) of the DM Act 2005, the “State Plan shall be prepared by the State Executive Committee
(SEC) having regard to the guidelines laid down by the National Authority.” Section 23 (3) states
that “the State Plan shall be approved by the State Authority.”3

1.5 Scope of SDMP

As per the DM Act 2005, the SDMP shall include 4:

a. Vulnerabilities of different parts of the State;

b. Measures to be adopted for prevention and mitigation of disasters;
c. Integration of mitigation measures into development plans and projects;
d. Capacity building and preparedness measures;
e. Roles and responsibilities of different departments of the State Government in the
context of the above-mentioned (a), (b), (c) and (d); and
f. Roles and responsibilities of different departments of the State Government in response
to any threatening disaster situation or disaster.

According to Section 23 (5) of the DM Act 2005, “the State Plan shall be reviewed and updated
annually.” In line with Section 23 (6), “appropriate provisions shall be made by the State
Government for financing the measures to be carried out under the State Plan.” Section 23 (7)
states that “copies of the State Plan referred to in Sub-Section (2) and (5) of Section 23 shall be
made available to the departments of the State Government and such Departments shall draw
up their own plans in accordance with the State Plan.”

1.6 Objectives of the Plan

The key objectives of SDMP are to:

 Assess various hazards, risks, vulnerabilities, and capacities in the State;

 Promote DRR for resilience building through structural and non-structural measures;
 Strengthen disaster risk governance across all levels;
 Mainstream Disaster Risk Management (DRM) in development schemes and
programmes;
 Implement rapid and effective disaster response and relief mechanisms in the State; and
 Ensure ‘Build Back Better’ in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

1.7 Time Frames: Short, Medium and Long-Term5

The measures listed in the Plan are set in line to be implemented by 2030 i.e. with the end of the
three post-2015 international agreements – Sendai Framework (SFDRR), SDGs, and Conference
of Parties (COP). They will be implemented within short (T1), medium (T2), and long (T3)

3 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 10). Retrieved from
[Link]
4 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 10). Retrieved from
[Link]
5 National Disaster Management Plan, 2019. [ebook] New Delhi: National Disaster Management Authority, Government of India, p.11.

Available at: [Link] [Accessed 22 July 2022].

8
terms, ending by 2024, 2027, 2030 respectively. To compensate for the time lost amidst the
COVID-19 pandemic, the time frame of the short-term has been altered from 2022 to 2024.
While some of the measures listed are already being implemented, few need upgradation, and
many are yet to be started. Also, the short, medium and long term measures do not need to be
taken up sequentially always. Depending upon the priority and completion time, the measures
will require to be taken up parallelly or sequentially.

Table 1: Time Frames envisaged in SDMP

Short-Term (T1) 2024

Medium-Term (T2) 2027

Long-Term (T3) 2030

1.8 Multi-Hazard Approach

SDMP will not only address natural hazards but will also take care of human-induced disasters.
It will enable the departments to assess a composite risk from all hazards so that integrated
planning can be undertaken and mitigation measures planned such that one hazard may not
create vulnerability for another hazard.

1.9 Stakeholders of the State Disaster Management Plan 6

All major line departments of the State Government, District Disaster Management Authorities
(DDMAs), technical institutions, academia, local self-governments, UN agencies, Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs), communities, etc. are key stakeholders for the effective
implementation of SDMP.

Detailed roles and responsibilities are depicted in the Thematic Areas for Action (TAA) along
with the Sub Thematic Areas for Action (STAA).

1.10 Implementation of State Disaster Management Plan

The DM Act states that every Department of the State Government shall make provisions, in its
annual budget, for funds to carry out the activities and programmes set out in its DM Plan. The
SDMP sets out the priorities and time frames, and defines the TAA along with STAA, that must
be implemented in a coordinated but decentralized manner by the State and District
Governments.

6 UPSDMA. (2017). Uttar Pradesh State Disaster Management Plan. Lucknow.

9
 2 DRR Coherence and Mutual Reinforcement of Three Post-
2015 Global Frameworks and its Integration with UP
SDMP
2.1 Background7
The adoption of three landmark global agreements – Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction (UNISDR 2015), Sustainable Development Goals (UN 2015) and Paris Agreement on
Climate Change – COP21 (UNFCC 2015) – all in the same year, 2015 – has opened a significant
opportunity to build coherence across DRR, sustainable development and the response to
climate change. Later during the COP26 (UNFCC 2021), agreement was sought to accelerate
action on the goals set up during COP21.
The SDGs adopted by the UN on the theme “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development” is a global transformative plan of action, keeping poverty eradication
as the overarching aim. It has, at its core, the integration of the economic, social and
environmental dimensions of sustainable development. The Paris Agreement on Climate Change
points to the importance of averting, minimizing and addressing damage and loss associated
with the adverse effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow onset
events, and the role of sustainable development in reducing the risk of damage and loss.
DRR and resilience are the common recurring themes in the three global agreements
mentioned. All three agreements share a common aim of making development sustainable. The
most significant shift recognized in the SFDRR is a strong emphasis on DRM in contrast to DM.
These three agreements recognize the desired outcomes in DRR as a product of complex and
interconnected social and economic processes, which overlap across the agendas of the three
agreements intrinsic to sustainable development in DRR and building resilience to disasters.
Further, effective DRM contributes to sustainable development.

2.2 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030)

The SFDRR (2015–2030) was adopted at the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk
Reduction held in Sendai, Japan, in March 2015.
2.2.1 SDMP and SFDRR
In order to imbibe the global frameworks and principles in achieving the global targets, the
Government of Uttar Pradesh issued specific guidelines in line with Sendai Seven Targets
Campaign in November 2015 to integrate these frameworks in the implementation activities of
State and District-level line departments. The table below gives an outline of the activities
covered in various sections of the SDMP to achieve the targets of SFDRR.

7National Disaster Management Plan, 2019. [ebook] New Delhi: National Disaster Management Authority, Government of India.
Available at: [Link] [Accessed 22 July 2022].
10
 Table 2: SFDRR Targets and corresponding activities in SDMP

Targets Indicators SDMP

Substantially reduce global disaster Reduce State The SDMP charts out specific measures for
mortality by 2030, aiming to lower the disaster mortality by each disaster type in the State. These measures
average per 100,000 global mortality 2030 (per 100,000) are covered in detail across all areas of
rate in the decade 2020–2030 compared compared to last preparedness, for example, vulnerability
to the period 2005–2015 decade (2011–2020) assessment, early warning systems, community
engagement, communications, and resource
mobilization, which promote better response
to disasters, leading to better coping capacity
among the communities, thus contributing to
reduction in mortality across the State.

Substantially reduce the number of Reduction in the The SDMP of Uttar Pradesh is a comprehensive
people affected globally by 2030, aiming number of people strategy document, wherein preparedness,
to lower the average global figure per affected in the State response coordination, mitigation and early
100,000 in the decade 2020–2030 by disasters warning activities are provided for each line
compared to the period 2005–2015 compared to last department with the objective of reducing the
decade (2011–2020) impact of various disasters.

Substantially reduce disaster damage to Infrastructure and The SDMP details structural measures in
critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services Chapter 9 across different types of disasters for
basic services, among them health and both private and public properties.
educational facilities, including through
developing their resilience by 2030

Substantially enhance international International India and Nepal established a three-tier

cooperation to developing countries cooperation bilateral mechanism in 2008, for issues relating
through adequate and sustainable to cooperation in water resources, flood
support to complement their national management, inundation and hydropower
actions for the implementation of the between the two countries. However, SDMP
present framework by 2030 suggests executing MoU between State Uttar
Pradesh and Nepal.

Substantially increase the availability of Infrastructure and Multi-hazard early warning system for effective
and access to multi-hazard early basic services disaster risk information communication is
warning systems and disaster risk proposed.
information and assessments to people
by 2030

Reduce direct economic losses in Reduce direct SDMP addresses immediate relief in direct
relation to global domestic product by economic losses by economic losses due to disasters in categories
2030 2030 compared to of livelihood, agriculture, sericulture, animal
last decade (2011– husbandry through the State Disaster Response
2020) Fund (SDRF).
It also chalks out a plan in the chapter on
recovery and restoration of livelihood,
agriculture through wage employment and risk
transfer mechanism by convergence of various
Government programmes.

11
2.3 Sustainable Development Goals and Disaster Resilience
To achieve the SDGs, it is imperative that resilience of communities be built. The increasing
magnitude of losses due to disasters over the past decades indicates an elevated risk to
development projects from disasters. The inclusion of disaster risk reduction measures in
development planning not only helps reduce the risk, but also strengthens the lead to long-
lasting development gains. Hence, disaster resilience is an integral part of the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development.8
The SDMP has also attempted to integrate the SDGs in plans. The chapter on social inclusion
addresses the aspects of differentiated vulnerabilities of women, socially and economically weaker
section of society and elderly and also laid responsibility matrix. APDA Mitra is gradually gaining
larger participation of women. The Niti Aayog Indicators have been used to examine the social and
structural vulnerability of the State, which when addressed will contribute achieving the SDGs. The
plan aims to also bring the aspects of Climate Change, one of the goals of SDG being Climate Action,
by including Climate Change Risk Management as one the thematic area, with various sub-themes,
under all applicable disasters.

The following figure shows how the SFDRR leads to direct impacts on multiple goals and targets
of SDGs.

Figure 1: Coherence and Mutual Reinforcement of SDGs and SFDRR

Source: Integrated monitoring of the global targets of the Sendai Framework and the Sustainable
Development Goals ([Link]
monitor/common-indicators)

2.4 International Agreements on Climate Change (Conference of Parties) and

DRR
The Paris Agreement on Climate Change was adopted on 12 December 2015 at the twenty-first
session of the Conference of the Parties (COP21).

8UNDRR. (2015). DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND RESILIENCE IN THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT [Ebook].
Retrieved from [Link]
12
 Figure 2: Convergence between CCA and DRR (Turnbull et al. 2013)

Later in 2021, the COP26 summit held in Glasgow, United Kingdom, brought parties together to
accelerate action towards the goals of the Paris Agreement (COP21) and the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change.9 It set out the following goals:
i. To achieve global net-zero by the middle of the century and keep 1.5 degrees within
reach;
ii. To adapt to protect communities as well as natural habitats from the impact of climate
change;
iii. To mobilize finances for the stated goals; and
iv. To work together so that the rules could be listed out in detail and help in the fulfilment
of the Paris Agreement.
India is a signatory to COP26 goals and had presented the following five nectar
elements (Panchamrit) of India’s climate action:10

i. Reach 500 GW non-fossil energy capacity by 2030;

ii. 50 per cent of its energy requirements from renewable energy by 2030;
iii. Reduction of total projected carbon emissions by one billion tonnes from now to 2030;
iv. Reduction of the carbon intensity of the economy by 45 per cent by 2030, over 2005
levels; and
v. Achievement of the target of net zero emissions by 2070.
The significant initiative of COP 27 at Sham-el-Shaeikh, Egypt on “Loss and Damage” Fund is
likely to have implication for National as well as State policy and plans.
The Government of Uttar Pradesh through its Directorate of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change (DoEFCC) is working towards contributing to these goals. The SDMP lays out detailed

9 COP26 Goals - UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) at the SEC – Glasgow 2021. (2021). Retrieved 22 July 2022, from
[Link]
10 India's Stand at COP-26. (2021). Retrieved 22 July 2022, from [Link]

13
institutional arrangements for the DoEFCC for taking preparedness and response measures
during disasters.

2.5 Prime Minister’s Ten-Point Agenda ([Link]/newssite 09th

January 2017) and UPSDMP
The UPSDMA envisions imbibing the Prime Minister’s Ten-Point Agenda into all parts of the
prospective UPSDMP. Agenda-wise suggested actions as reflected in the SDMP are mentioned
below.

S. No. Agenda Suggested Actions SDMP

1 All development sectors All stakeholders including relevant line departments to Part II
must imbibe the mainstream DRM in routine development programmes
principles of DRM. and schemes.

2 Work towards risk DM plans of departments and Districts to focus on all Part II
coverage for all – sectors of people and institutions, and implement
starting from poor according to the roles and responsibilities assigned in
households to Small the SDMP. Involvement of SMEs, private sector, Public-
and Medium-Sized Private Partnership (PPP), involvement of the
Enterprises (SMEs) to corporate sector in capacity building and resource
multinational development and knowledge management should be
corporations to nation- focused on.
States.

3 Encourage greater Role of women during reconstruction and recovery Part II

involvement and programmes after disasters are to be given due & III
leadership of women in consideration. Owner-Driven Reconstruction (ODR) is
DRM. one method whereby women can take a leadership role
in monitoring the implementation of safe housing
technology. Women can also be empowered by
creating their Self-Help Groups (SHGs) for livelihood
opportunities. It needs to go beyond traditional
income-generating activities and aim at enhancing
skills as masons, carpenters, trading of local products,
developing local shops for housing, sanitation and
other materials, among others. Chapter on Social
Inclusion in DRR addresses the differentiated
vulnerability of women.

4 Invest in risk mapping Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis Parts I
globally to improve (HRVCA) to be carried out in an intensive way by all and II
global understanding of Districts and relevant State-level line departments.
nature and disaster Understanding risk is one of the six thematic areas in
risks. the SDMP for all disasters, which includes risk
mapping/zonation.

5 Leverage technology to Deploying advanced technology and equipment to be Part II

enhance the efficiency included in the capacity building themes for DRR. Use
of DRM efforts. of information and communications technologies and
advanced technologies for early warning systems.

6 Develop a network of Ensure academic and technical Part II

14
S. No. Agenda Suggested Actions SDMP

universities to work on institutions/universities are given the responsibilities

disaster issues as they of documentation, training and research in the field of
also have social DRR concerning various disasters. UP SDMA has
responsibilities. executed MoU with five leading universities of the
State.

7 Utilize the Extensive behaviour changes Part II

opportunities provided communication/Information, Education and
by social media and Communication (IEC) campaigns to create awareness
mobile technologies, through print, electronic and social media.
recognize the potential
of social media, and
develop applications for
all aspects of DRM.

8 Build on local capacity Ensure strengthening of disaster risk governance at all Part II
and initiative. levels from ‘local to centre’ and empower both local
authorities and communities as partners to reduce and
manage disaster risks. Emphasis on building and
strengthening local capacities with a focus on local
issues, resources, and people.

9 Ensure that the Documentation of lessons learnt, best practices and Part
opportunity to learn success stories as part of knowledge management. III
from a disaster must
not be wasted.

10 Bring about greater Ensure participation in international efforts and Part I

cohesion in fostering partnerships. & II
international response
to disasters.

15
 3 State Profile

3.1 Background
Uttar Pradesh is the fourth largest State in India covering an area of 2,40,928 sq. km, which is
7.33 per cent of the geographical area of the country.11 It lies between 23°52’N and 31°28’N
latitudes and 77°3′ and 84°39’E longitudes.12 It borders Nepal and Uttarakhand in the North;
Himachal Pradesh in the North-west; Haryana, Delhi and Rajasthan in the West; Madhya
Pradesh in the West and South-west; Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand in South and South-east, and
Bihar in the East.

Figure 3: Administrative Map of Uttar Pradesh State

Topographically, the State is divided into three regions, namely the Shivalik region in the north,
Gangetic plains in the centre, and Vindhyan hills and plateau in the south. Many rivers – Ganga,
Yamuna, Gandak, Gomti, Ghagra, Chambal, Betwa, Kosi, Son and Sharda – flow through the State.
As per the India State of Forest Report,13 Uttar Pradesh has a forest cover spread across

11 Forest Survey of India. (2019). Indian State of Forest Report [Ebook]. Dehradun. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]
12 | About UP | Official Website of NRI Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, India | UPNRI. Retrieved from

[Link]
13 Forest Survey of India. (2019). Indian State of Forest Report [Ebook]. Dehradun. Retrieved from [Link]

[Link]
16
14,805.65 sq. km, which is 6.15 per cent of the State’s geographical area. 14 The climate of Uttar
Pradesh is generally defined as a sub-tropical monsoon type. Three seasons are experienced in
the State: summer (March–June), monsoon (June–September) and winter (October–February).15

3.2 Administrative Structure

At present, Uttar Pradesh is administratively divided into 18 divisions, 75 Districts and 822
development blocks. There are 915 urban bodies, 13 municipal corporations, 226 municipal
boards, 59,163 gram sabhas, 8,135 nyaya panchayats, 1,07,040 villages and 650 cities and
towns.16

3.3 Demographic Profile

Table 3: Demographic Profile of Uttar Pradesh

Area 2,40,928 sq. km

Population (as per Census 2011:

19,95,81,477
provisional data)

Males (as per Census 2011) 10,45,96,415

Females (as per Census 2011) 9,49,85,062

Child Population (0–6 years) (as

29,728,235
per Census 2011)

Child Sex Ratio (0–6 years) (as per

899 per 1,000
Census 2011)

Decennial Growth Rate (2001–

20.09%
2011) (as per Census 2011)

Sex Ratio (as per Census 2011) 908 per 1,000

Density (persons per sq. km) (as

828 per 1,000
per Census 2011)

Total Literacy Rate 69.72%

Male Literacy 79.24%

Female Literacy 59.26%

14 Forest Survey of India. (2019). Indian State of Forest Report [Ebook]. Dehradun. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]
15 About UP | Weather | Official Website of NRI Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, India | UPNRI. Retrieved from

[Link]
16 About Us | Social Demography | Welcome to the Official Web Site of Government of Uttar Pradesh. Retrieved from

[Link]
17
Districts 75

Cities and Towns 915

Development Blocks 82

Nagar Nigams 14

Members of Lok Sabha from UP 80

Members of Rajya Sabha from UP 30

Members of UP Legislative
404
Assembly

Members of UP Legislative Council 100

Paddy, wheat, barley, millet, maize, urad (black gram), moong

Principal Crops
(green gram), arhar

Principal Fruits Mango, guava

Limestone, dolomite, soap stone, gypsum, bauxite, glass-sand,

Principal Minerals
manganese, non-plastic fire clay

Chikan work, embroidery, wood work, wooden toys and

Principal Handicrafts
furniture, clay toys, carpet weaving, silk and brassware work

Birha, Chitee, Kajri, Phaag, Rasia, Alha, Pooran Bhagat,

Principal Folklores
Bhartrahari

Principal Rivers Ganga, Yamuna, Gomti, Ram Ganga, Ghagra, Betwa, Ken

Charkula, Karma, Pandav, Pai-danda, Tharu, Dhobia, Raai,

Principal Folk Dances
Shaira, etc.

Piparhava, Kaushambi, Shravasti, Sarnath (Varanasi),

Tourist and Historical Places
Kushinagar, Chitrakoot, Lucknow, Agra, Jhansi, Meerut

Source: Statistical Department, UP and Directorate Census, Lucknow (2011)

3.4 Social Profile

Religion17
Hinduism is the predominant religion in the State, with 79.73 per cent of the State’s population
adhering to it, followed by Islam (19.26 per cent), Sikhism (0.32 per cent), Christianity (0.18 per
cent), Jainism (0.11 per cent), Buddhism (0.10 per cent) and others (0.30 per cent).
Caste and Tribes

17 Uttar Pradesh Religion Census 2011. Retrieved from [Link]

18
The population of Uttar Pradesh is divided into multiple castes and sub-castes and the State is
also home to many tribal communities. As per the Socio-Economic and Caste Census 2011,
Scheduled Castes (SCs) constitute 23.80 per cent of the State’s total rural households, while
Scheduled Tribes (STs) form 0.68 per cent of the total rural population.
Prominent tribes in the State include Agariya, Aheria, Baiga, Bind and Patari. Besides this, the
Government of India has recognized five of the tribal communities as disadvantaged STs,
namely the Harus, Boksas, Bhotias, Jaunswaris and Rajis.

3.5 Economic Profile

Main Occupation
Uttar Pradesh is the second-largest economy in India after Maharashtra. The State is divided
into four economic zones: Western, Central, Eastern and Bundelkhand regions. Agriculture is
the main source of income followed by the services sector, industries and manufacturing and
tourism.
Income Patterns
The Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) of Uttar Pradesh grew at a Compounded Annual
Growth Rate (CAGR) of around 8.43 per cent between 2015–16 and 2021-22 to reach INR 21.74
trillion (US$ 294.90 billion).18 The Net State Domestic Product grew at a CAGR of around 8.42
per cent between 2015–16 and 2020–21 to reach INR 15.12 trillion (US$ 208.34 billion).
According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey 2017–18, Uttar Pradesh has an unemployment
rate of 6.4 per cent, which is higher than the all-India unemployment rate of 6.1 per cent.

3.6 Sectors of the Economy

Agriculture
Uttar Pradesh’s economy is predominantly based on agriculture. Several major efforts have
been made to boost agriculture, including the extension of irrigation facilities, timely delivery of
fertilizers, herbicides and high-yielding seeds, promotion of high-yielding kinds of seed use, and
the provision of continual agricultural counselling services by experts.
Accounting for nearly 18 per cent share in the country’s total food grain output in 2016–17,
Uttar Pradesh produces the largest amount of food grains (major being rice, wheat, maize,
millet, gram, pea, lentils); and is also the largest producer of vegetables (10,02,64,000 metric
tonnes in 2018–19) in India. 19
Industries
There are a number of industrial activities such as information technology, agro-processing,
tourism, textiles, leather goods, carpets, cotton yarn, handloom and handicrafts, food
processing, sports goods, dairy products, and glassware production.

18 GSDP of Uttar Pradesh, Economic Growth of Uttar Pradesh | IBEF. (2022). Retrieved 1 August 2022, from
[Link]
19 About Uttar Pradesh: Tourism, Agriculture, Industries, Economy & Geography. Retrieved 1 August 2022, from

[Link]
19
According to data supplied by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, the
State received US$ 560.74 million in foreign direct investment equity inflow between October
2019 and December 2020. In Uttar Pradesh, 147 investment intentions of INR 16,799 crore
(US$ 2.40 billion) were declared in 2019. As of October 2020, Uttar Pradesh had 21 notified
Special Economic Zones (SEZs), 13 operational SEZs and 24 formally approved SEZs.
Services
Uttar Pradesh’s economy is heavily reliant on the service sector. In 2017–18, it contributed
about 49 per cent of the GSDP. Uttar Pradesh remains North India’s ‘IT hub’, with a percentage
of software exports second only to Karnataka. However, unlike South Indian States, IT
businesses are restricted to specific locations, such as Noida, Greater Noida and Ghaziabad, all of
which are located in the western region of the State.
Tourism
Taj Mahal, which is one of the famous tourist destinations, is located in Agra, Uttar Pradesh20.
In 2019, domestic tourist arrivals in the State reached 535.8 million. Foreign tourist arrivals
crossed 4.74 million. The Government of Uttar Pradesh has devised a new tourism policy to
invite INR 5,000 crore worth of investments, which is expected to provide a further boost to
the State’s economy. Varanasi, Allahabad, Mathura-Vrindavan, Ayodhya, Lucknow and Sarnath
are the other major cities attracting tourists.

20About Uttar Pradesh: Tourism, Agriculture, Industries, Economy & Geography. Retrieved 1 August 2022, from
[Link]
20
 4 Institutional Framework

4.1 Disaster Management: Basic Institutional Framework

As per the DM Act of 2005, each State in India shall have its own institutional framework for
Disaster Risk Management (DRM). It mandates the setting up of a State Disaster Management
Authority (SDMA). Each State shall prepare its own SDMP.

Figure 5: State Level Disaster Management Coordination Mechanism

4.2 State Disaster Management Authority

Section 14 of the DM Act 2005 mandates each State to establish an SDMA. At the State level, the
SDMA headed by the Chief Minister lays down the policies and plans for DM. It is also
responsible for coordinating the implementation of the State Plan, recommending the provision
of funds (under State Disaster Mitigation Fund) for mitigation and preparedness measures and
reviewing the developmental plans of the different departments of the State to ensure
integration of prevention, preparedness and mitigation measures. The Chairperson of the State
Authority shall, in the case of an emergency, have the power to exercise all or any of the powers
of the State Authority, but the exercise of such powers shall be subject to ex post facto
ratification of the State Authority.
For the State of Uttar Pradesh, the establishment of SDMA was notified vide notification Order
No. 628/1-11-2017-02(G)/2013 dated 18 July 2017 under Section-14 (1) of the DM Act. The
constitution of the SDMA is as follows:
21
 Table 4: SDMA Chairperson and Members

S. No. Members Designation

1 Hon. Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh Chairperson

2 Designated by Chairperson Vice Chairperson

3 Hon. Minister, Urban Development Member

4 Hon. Minister, Agriculture Member

5 Hon. Minister, Irrigation Member

6 Hon. Minister, AYUSH Member

7 Hon. Minister Flood Control Member

8 Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Member

9 Principal Secretary, Revenue Member

10 Principal Secretary, Home Member

Special Invitees

11 Agriculture Production Commissioner Member

12 Principal Secretary, Finance Member

4.3 Roles and Responsibilities of UPSDMA (Chapter III Disaster Management

Act 200521)
4.4 State Executive Committee
For the State of Uttar Pradesh, the establishment of the SEC was notified vide notification Order
No. 418/1-10-2016-14(15)/2009, dated 6 April 2016 under Section 20(1) of the DM Act22. The
constitution of the SEC is as follows:

21 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 8). Retrieved from
[Link]
22 Government of India. (2005). The Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 8). Retrieved from

[Link]
22
 Table 5: SEC Chairperson and Members

S. No. Members Designation

1 Chief Secretary Chairperson

2 Agriculture Production Commissioner Member

3 ACS Finance Member

4 ACS Home Member

5 ACS Revenue Member

6 ACS Medical Health and Family Welfare Member

7 Relief Commissioner Member Secretary

4.5 State Relief Commissioner

Section 11 of the Uttar Pradesh DM Act 2005 mandates the appointment of the State Relief
Commissioner for the whole of the State, not below the rank of Secretary to the Government.23
Sections 21 and 22 outline the powers and functions of the Relief Commissioner 24, wherein the
Commissioner may issue directions to the District Magistrate and local authority having
jurisdiction over the affected area to provide emergency relief in accordance with DM plans.

4.6 State Disaster Response Force

Uttar Pradesh is a multi-hazard State. It is vulnerable to natural hazards such as floods, heat
waves, earthquakes, drought, lightning and cold waves, as well as human-induced disasters such
as fire or building collapse. The State Disaster Response Force has been constituted at the State
level for effective response to such disasters.

4.7 State Emergency Operations Centre

The Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) has been set up at the State and District levels and acts
as the coordination and communication hub during a disaster situation. This is, however, not to
underestimate its normal-time activities.

4.8 District Disaster Management Authority

As per provisions in Chapter IV of the DM Act, each State Government shall set up a DDMA in
every District headed by the District Magistrate, with the elected representative of the local
authority as the co-chairperson.

23 GoUP. (2022). The Uttar Pradesh Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 30). Retrieved from
[Link]
24 GoUP. (2022). The Uttar Pradesh Disaster Management Act 2005 [Ebook] (p. 32-33). Retrieved from

[Link]
23
The DDMA will act as the planning, coordinating and implementing body for DM at the District
level, and take all necessary measures for the purposes of DM in accordance with the guidelines
laid down by UPSDMA. The DDMA will prepare the DM Plan for the District and ensure that the
guidelines for prevention, mitigation, preparedness, and response measures laid down by the
UPSDMA are followed by all the District-level offices of the various departments of the State
Government.
Table 6: DDMA Structure

S. No. Members Designation

1 District Magistrate Chairperson (ex officio)

2 Zila Panchayat President Co-Chairperson (ex officio)

3 Superintendent of Police/ Senior Superintendent of Police Member (ex officio)

4 Additional District Magistrate (ADM F/R) CEO (ex officio)

5 Chief Medical Officer Member (ex officio)

6 Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department Member

7 Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Member

24
 5 Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis
5.1 Uttar Pradesh at a Glance
The State of Uttar Pradesh falls under three agro-climatic zones25, which are as follows:
1. Agro-climatic Zone IV

This zone is further divided into three sub-zones:

(i) North-Eastern Plains covering the Districts of Bahraich, Gonda, Balrampur, Basti, Gorakhpur,
Siddharthnagar, Maharajganj, Kushinagar and Deoria, receives an annual rainfall of 1,210 mm
and the climate is moist sub-humid to dry sub-humid. About 73 per cent of the land area is
cultivated and about half of the cultivated land is irrigated. Tube wells are the major source of
irrigation.
(ii) Eastern Plains covering the Districts of Azamgarh, Mau, Ballia, Ayodhya, Ghazipur, Jaunpur,
Sant Ravidas Nagar and Varanasi, receives an annual rainfall of 1,025 mm and the climate is dry
sub-humid to moist sub-humid. Over 70 per cent of the land is cultivated and more than 80 per
cent of the cultivated area is irrigated.
(iii) Vindhyan sub-zone in the Middle Gangetic Plain covering the Districts of Mirzapur and
Sonbhadra in Uttar Pradesh, receives an annual rainfall of 1,134 mm and the climate is similar
to the other parts of the eastern plains of Uttar Pradesh. However, the region has a high forest
cover, about 40 per cent of the land. Less than one third of this land is cultivated and only a third
of this is irrigated.
2. Agro-climatic zone-V
This zone covering 32 Districts of Uttar Pradesh is among the larger and very thickly populated
agro-climatic zones that is cultivated and well-irrigated. It is the most developed region in the
State as over 70 per cent of the area is sown and nearly 65 per cent of it is irrigated.
Characterized by semi-arid and sub-humid conditions, the mean annual rainfall in this zone
varies between 700 and 1,000 mm. There are three sub-zones under this Agro-climatic Zone.
(i) Central Plains covering the Districts of Prayagraj, Fatehpur, Pratapgarh, Sultanpur,
Raebareli, Unnao, Lucknow, Barabanki, Sitapur, Hardoi, Lakhimpur Kheri and Pilibhit, receives
an average annual rainfall of 979 mm, the climate ranges from dry sub-humid to semi-arid, and
the soil is alluvium calcareous sandy loam. About 62 per cent of the land is cultivated, of which
56 per cent is irrigated.
(ii) North-Western Plains covering the Districts of Shahjahanpur, Bareilly, Rampur, Moradabad,
Bijnor, Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Meerut, Baghpat, Ghaziabad and Bulandshahr, has the
highest land productivity in the State. About 70 per cent of the land is under agriculture and
another 5 per cent of the land is under forest cover. Around 76 per cent of the net sown area is
irrigated with tube wells being the predominant source of irrigation. The zone receives an
annual average rainfall of 907 mm, the climate is dry sub-humid to semi-arid, and the soil is
loam to sandy loam.

[Link]. 2022. 1. [online] Available at:

[Link]
nd%20Hills%20region.
25
(iii) South-Western Plains has low land productivity, despite a relatively high proportion of
arable and irrigated cropped area. This is due to cultivation of low-value crops, principally
wheat and bajra. Covering the Districts of Badaun, Aligarh, Mathura, Agra, Etah, Farrukhabad,
Kannauj, Mainpuri, Firozabad, Etawah, Kanpur Dehat, and Kanpur Nagar, this region’s climate is
semi-arid and the soil type is alluvium calcareous clay. The region receives annual rainfall of
721 mm. More than 74 per cent of the net sown area is irrigated and over 69 per cent land is
cultivated.
3. Agro-climatic Zone-VIII
This zone includes five Districts from South-Central Uttar Pradesh: Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur,
Hamirpur and Banda, collectively known as the Bundelkhand sub-zone, which receives annual
rainfall of about 900 mm. Due to less developed irrigation facilities only 60 per cent of the area
is cultivated, out of which 25 per cent is irrigated. Due to high soil erosion, land productivity is
low.
In conclusion, the Central Plains are considered to be among the most fertile lands, although the
concurrent floods in the Ghaghra and Rapti basin make agriculture vulnerable to floods from
June to October. Agro-climatic zone-VIII is also vulnerable to recurrent droughts.

5.2 Hazard Profile of the State

“Hazard is a process, phenomenon or human activity that may cause loss of life, injury or other
health impacts, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental
degradation”.26
Natural hazards that cause significant impact in Uttar Pradesh are flood, drought, fire and
earthquake. In addition, the State is also vulnerable to various human-induced hazards such as
stampede, chemical, radiological and fire accidents.
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has notified 10 State-specific major hazards as disasters,
other than those notified by the Government of India. In Uttar Pradesh so far, the following 19
disasters have been notified.
Table 1.1: Notified Disasters in the State

Government of India Notified Disaster Government of Uttar Pradesh Notified Disaster

Flood Unseasonal heavy rainfall/excess rainfall
Drought Lightning
Earthquake Thunderstorm
Hailstorm Heat wave
Cold wave Boat accident
Cloud burst Snake bite
Fire Gas leakage/sewer
Landslide Borewell death
Pest attack Human and animal conflict
cyclone Drowning death (recently notified)
Avalanche Bull and Blue Cow
[

26 Hazard. (2022). Retrieved 22 July 2022, from [Link]

26
5.3 Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Analysis (HRVA)
Flood is a major hazard across 40 of the 75 Districts. This is followed by drought, which affects
Districts in the Vindhya and Bundelkhand regions. The disaster vulnerabilities are listed in
Table 1.2. This is based on the Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Analysis (HRVA) carried out for
the SDMP. Details of the same are provided in the subsequent sections.
Table 1.2: Hazard Risk and Vulnerability of the State

S. Hazard Districts Under Maximum Risk Number of Vulnerable Severity

No. (In Terms of Damage and Loss) Districts
1 Flood Eastern and North-Western parts of 40 Moderate to
Uttar Pradesh high
2 Drought All Districts 75 Low to high
Bundelkhand Region 11 High to very
high
3 Earthquake North-East, East, Central, North, 31 Low to high
North-West and West
4 Lightning All Districts 75 Low to high
5 Thunderstorm All Districts 75 Low to high
6 Heat wave All Districts 75 Low to high
7 Cold wave All Districts 75 Low to high
Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh (2021)

Vulnerability Mapping by Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council

(BMTPC)
The vulnerability mapping by BMTPC involves checking whether a building situated in a
seismically active area has sufficient robustness to withstand a specific magnitude earthquake,
flood or other natural disaster. BMTPC carried out a structural vulnerability assessment of Uttar
Pradesh in 2019 in which they found that around 50.7 per cent of rural houses are made up of
burnt brick wall and stone packed with mortar, and 18 per cent of houses are made up of mud
and unburnt brick wall. These houses are at high risk in earthquake and very high risk in flood-
prone areas. Usually, the walls get washed away during heavy rainfall and severe flood
situations. Houses built with burnt bricks and stones packed with mortar are less susceptible to
earthquakes and have medium vulnerability to floods.

27
 Figure 1: Risk analysis of houses in UP

Source: Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council ATLAS, 2019

From the perspective of structural vulnerability of wall and roofing of housing structures, 19.3 per
cent of the housing structures (both rural and urban) that are made up of mud and unburnt brick
wall are highly vulnerable to flood and wind velocity above 55 m/s. Also, housing structures with
stone wall not packed with mortar remain highly vulnerable to floods. This shows that the level of
risk remains the same even when the structural quality gets better, which still poses a threat to life
and property.
About 69.5 per cent of houses with burnt brick (both rural and urban) and stone packed walls are
moderately vulnerable to floods and earthquakes as structural quality has improved. Houses with
concrete walls are the least vulnerable to earthquakes, storms and floods. This shows that the
higher the standards of structural quality of infrastructure, the less vulnerable these would be in
case of any disaster.

Trends in Mortality across Various Disasters in Uttar Pradesh

28
 981

Figure 7: Trends of Deaths in Various Disaster Categories

Source: Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

In 2021-22, the highest number of deaths were registered in the snakebite category. This was
followed by heavy rainfall and floods. Deaths due to lightning and thunderstorms have also been
substantially high.

5.3.1 Flood
Flood is a recurrent disaster in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Some of the major rivers that cause
floods in the State are the Ganga, Ghaghra, Yamuna, Ram Ganga, Gomti, Rapti, Sharda, and
Gandak. The Eastern Districts of Uttar Pradesh are the most vulnerable to floods in comparison
to Western and Central Districts.

29
 Table 7: Flood history in Uttar Pradesh (1973-2019)

S. Year Number of Affected Population Affected Total Affected Affected Agricultural Damaged Estimated
No. Affected (in Thousands) Villages Area (in Land (in Hectares) Houses (in Financial Loss (in
Districts Hectares) Lakhs) Crores)

1 1973 40 141.5 30004 35 22.23 2.98 296.84

2 1974 39 73.9 14928 19.86 12.24 2.03 173.16
3 1975 36 92.14 18629 23.65 14.21 2.01 192.44

4 1976 36 31.95 32962 33.49 18.49 2.05 234.79

5 1977 31 37 7536 12.87 6.42 0.51 77.04
6 1978 55 225.87 48889 72.5 38.82 11.98 688.34
7 1979 16 21.04 3913 7.03 5.18 0.23 57.57

8 1980 46 303.47 44629 58.57 30.94 19.23 790.67

9 1981 33 146.27 20706 29.91 16.35 4.91 286.38
10 1982 44 232.91 32459 55.38 33.09 10.18 585.65
11 1983 56 155.34 24731 38.6 24.99 5.16 754.03
12 1984 39 65.75 11600 16.68 10.31 0.83 262.15
13 1985 55 195.59 27113 40.28 24.19 6.2 1216.26
14 1986 45 59.19 8925 10.34 6.45 0.51 268.14
15 1987 9 38.24 5807 5.81 3.16 1.8 186.14
16 1988 46 182.04 24721 31.76 17.14 3.71 834.6
17 1989 25 48.62 8281 10.3 6.52 0.78 NA
18 1990 51 85.34 15524 22.03 10.64 1.32 NA

30
 S. Year Number of Affected Population Affected Total Affected Affected Agricultural Damaged Estimated
No. Affected (in Thousands) Villages Area (in Land (in Hectares) Houses (in Financial Loss (in
Districts Hectares) Lakhs) Crores)

19 1991 29 24.19 3372 8.1 2.1 0.78 NA

20 1992 20 29.24 4254 5.91 3.34 0.34 NA

21 1993 34 75.05 11765 15.11 7.91 1..37 NA

22 1994 45 39.07 9627 9.86 5.98 0.66 NA
23 1995 51 36.91 8874 12.79 7.98 0.88 NA
24 1996 44 72.2 8827 11.24 6.78 0.09 NA

25 1997 29 10.21 2284 3.49 1.55 0.03 NA

26 1998 55 121.91 15168 25.23 14.15 3.84 NA
27 1999 11 1.83 2.99 5.39 4.69 0.0049 NA
28 2000 40 63.86 5882 7.84 4.724 0.0089 NA

29 2001 21 27.15 3819 4.63 2.89 0.09 NA

30 2002 14 3.86 770 1.1 0.62 0.0061 NA
31 2003 54 134.8 17011 23.6 15.03 0.35 NA
32 2004 2 14.36 865 2.439 - - NA

33 2005 35 24.511 3652 3.597 3.835 0.7732 NA

34 2006 12 4.53 678 - - - NA
35 2007 23 26.53 578 8.49 5.66 0.34 519.88

36 2008 32 41.75 6287 4.988 - 5.3 NA

37 2009 15 2038 1712 4.988 - 0.04 129.3

31
 S. Year Number of Affected Population Affected Total Affected Affected Agricultural Damaged Estimated
No. Affected (in Thousands) Villages Area (in Land (in Hectares) Houses (in Financial Loss (in
Districts Hectares) Lakhs) Crores)

38 2010 44 53.76 6819 - 6.7 1.19 1013.784

39 2011 36 23.06 3587 5.25 3.96 0.0553 1438.44

40 2012 15 6.835 1118 - 1.241 0.796 117.87

41 2013 40 35.44 5785 5.646 3.49 0.7828 3259.53
42 2014 22 15.39 1895 4.72 4.72 754.3284
43 2015 No flood

44 2016 31 22.34 3078 5.96 4.21 0.4679 812.53

45 2017 33 29.23 3147 4.37 2.28 0.2877 862.9
46 2018 24 5.918 947 NA 1.9 0.2806 556.43
47 2019 40 7.459 1297 NA 60.03 0.5664 842.33
Source: Flood Book 2019, Flood Management Information System, Department of Irrigation, Government of Uttar Pradesh

Over time, the number of deaths reported due to floods has shown a declining trend. One reason could be better preparedness for floods as a result
of strengthened systems in the State.

Flood-affected Regions of Uttar Pradesh

A detailed analysis of the flood history of the State, supported by the collated data by the Department of Irrigation, Government of Uttar Pradesh,
shows that 40 Districts are most vulnerable to floods. Of these, 24 Districts are in the ‘very severe’ category, while 16 are in the ‘severe’ category. The
severity is defined based on the frequency of floods in the Districts. Lakhimpur Kheri, Shravasti, Sitapur, Bahraich, Barabanki, Gonda, Basti,
Siddharthnagar, Ayodhya, Balrampur, Maharajganj, Sant Kabir Nagar, Deoria, Kushinagar, Mau, Azamgarh, Ballia, Gorakhpur, Ghazipur, Ambedkar
Nagar, Bijnor, Pilibhit, Badaun, and Farrukhabad Districts are in the ‘very severe’ category. All the affected Districts are in Sharda, Rapti, and Ghaghra
basin, where one of the major reasons for flooding is the release of water from Nepal.

32
 Figure 8: Very Severe and Severe Flood-Prone Districts of Uttar Pradesh27

Source: Flood Book 2019, Flood Management Information System, Department of Irrigation, Government of Uttar Pradesh

27 Source: Flood Management Information System Centre, Uttar Pradesh

33
About 16 Districts have been placed in the ‘severe’ category. These are mainly in the Ram Ganga and Ganga river basins. These are flooded once in
two years due to perennial rainfall in the region. The Districts are Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Bulandshahr, Rampur, Aligarh, Gautam Buddh Nagar,
Moradabad, Bareilly, Kasganj, Shahjahanpur, Hardoi, Unnao, Lucknow, Hamirpur, Prayagraj and Varanasi.

Figure 9: River Basins of Uttar Pradesh

34
 Table 1.3: Flood-Affected Areas in Uttar Pradesh 28
Flood-affected Affected Districts
Regions
Western Moradabad, Rampur, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Aligarh, Saharanpur, Bareilly, Bijnor,
Pilibhit, Badaun, Shahjahanpur and Bulandshahr

Eastern Ayodhya, Balrampur, Gorakhpur, Ghazipur, Deoria, Basti, Mau, Ballia, Sant Kabir
Nagar, Siddharthnagar, Maharajganj, Kushinagar, Azamgarh, Gonda, Shravasti,
Bahraich, Lakhimpur Kheri, Ambedkar Nagar and Varanasi

Central Lucknow, Farrukhabad, Sitapur, Hardoi, Kasganj, Barabanki, Raebareli, Unnao and
Prayagraj

Bundelkhand Hamirpur

Discharge from Perennial Rivers

Floods have been a commonly recurring phenomenon in the State, affecting almost half of the
State almost every year. Yamuna and Ganga, 2 of the 10 perennial rivers of India, follows half its
course through Uttar Pradesh, which when precipitated with the extensive rainfall in the
monsoon creates a flood situation starting from Bijnor, Farrukhabad, and Kasganj to Varanasi
and Prayagraj. Additionally, extensive rainfall in the Terai region of Nepal leads to massive
release of water from the Karnali, Mahakali and Narayani River basins (details of trans-
boundary rivers are annexed) towards downstream in Ramganga, Gomti, Sharda, Ghaghra, Rapti
and Gandak. This results in floods across Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Details of the highest danger
levels that have been recorded in the past are listed in Table 8.
Table 8: Main Rivers, Gauge Station and Highest Flood Level

S. River Gauge Site District Highest Year Danger Level

No. Flood (m)
Level (m)
1 Ganga Bhim Gaura Haridwar 296.23 1978 294.00
2 Ganga Narora Bulandshahr 180.01 2010 178.42
3 Ganga CHCM Ganga Barrage Bijnor 220.20 1997 220.00

4 Ram Katghar Railway Bridge Moradabad 193.94 1924 190.60

Ganga
5 Yamuna Okhla Barrage Ghaziabad 201.35 1995 200.60
6 Yamuna ISBT Delhi 207.49 1978 204.83
7 Ken Bariyapur Bandha Madhya 193.40 2005 189.74
Pradesh
8 Gomti Hanuman Setu Gomti Lucknow 110.85 1971 109.50
Barrage
10 Sharada Sharada Nagar Lakhimpur 136.55 1993 135.49
Kheri
11 Sharada Paliakala Lakhimpur 155.17 2008 153.62

28 Source: Irrigation & Water Resource Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh

35
S. River Gauge Site District Highest Year Danger Level
No. Flood (m)
Level (m)
Kheri
12 Ghaghara Kartania Ghat (Girija Bahraich 137.12 1975 136.78
Barrage)
13 Ghaghara Elgin Bridge Barabanki 107.40 2008 106.07
14 Ghaghara Ayodhya Ayodhya 93.84 2008 92.73
15 Ghaghara Turtipar Ballia 66.00 1998 64.01
16 Rapti Rapti Barrage Shravasti 129.55 2006 127.70
17 Rapti Bardghat Gorakhpur 77.54 1998 74.98
19 Saryu Saryu Barrage Bahraich 134.50 1995 133.50
Source: Department of Irrigation, Uttar Pradesh

Dam/Barrage Flow Discharge

Uttar Pradesh has a large network of dams and barrages. Some of the major dams are listed in
Table 1.5. Over time, a large number of major barrages have been constructed above rivers such
as Ram Ganga, Ghaghra, Rapti, Ganga and Yamuna. These are perennial rivers and receive glacial
water along with rainfall during the period from June to September. Barrages above rivers in
the lower Ganga basin ensure availability of water during the summer months and help in
drought mitigation. On the other hand, rivers in the upper Ganga basin receive excessive rainfall
during the said period. This situation is further exacerbated when Nepal releases water into
India. This is contributing factor for floods in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. A high level of siltation in
the Rapti basin creates multiple drainage channels in the rivers. Because of this situation, when
the water is released from Nepal, there is a change in the course of the rivers, resulting in floods
in the upper Gangetic basin.
Table 1.5: Major Dams of Uttar Pradesh

S. No. Name of Dams Main River District

1 Parichha Dam Betwa River Jhansi
2 Matatila Dam Betwa River Lalitpur
3 Govind Ballabh Pant Sagar Dam Rihand River Sonbhadra
4 Jamni Dam Jamni Lalitpur
5 Kalagarh Dam Ram Ganga River Bijnor
6 Rohini Dam Rohini River Lalitpur
7 Shahzad Dam Shahzad River Lalitpur District
8 Govind Sagar Dam Shahzad River Lalitpur District
9 Sajnam Dam Sajnam River Lalitpur
10 Sukma-Dukma Dam Betwa River Jhansi
11 Jirgo Reservoir Jirgo River Mirzapur
12 Musa Kahand Karmnasa River Chandauli and Varanasi
Source: Uttar Pradesh State Disaster Management Plan 2018–19

Siltation
Siltation across the Ganga and Yamuna Rivers has been one of the challenges for change of flow
from the normal course of the river. Downstream of the Rishikesh and Bhigauda Barrages, the
Ganga flows through braided channels during the lean season. The width of the river changes
from 1 to 3 km. The river forms chute channels and multiple channels in the upstream.

36
When the Ganga River reaches Prayagraj, it flows mostly in single channels, except at a few
places, where siltation is present. The channels get distributed mainly at the Ram Ganga
confluence, where a large part of sediment is received. Similarly, the confluence of the Ganga
and Yamuna also creates congestion in discharge due to siltation in Prayagraj, which leads to
floods in the region.
The Remote Sensing Application Centre (RSAC), Uttar Pradesh has initiated the study of
rejuvenation, desilting and storage capacity of the Manorama, Tamsa and Varuna rivers of Uttar
Pradesh. The analysis is to be used in the preparation of detailed integrated development plans
for rejuvenation, desilting and increasing the flow of these rivers.

Flood Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (HRVCA)

Hazard/Location  Flood is the main disaster faced by the State each year. Historically, most of the
Districts experienced floods. However, since the 2000s, this climatic pattern
has changed due to climate change, and the predominantly flood-prone
Districts are also witnessing drought or drought-like conditions
 Lakhimpur Kheri, Shravasti, Sitapur, Bahraich, Barabanki, Gonda, Basti,
Siddharthnagar, Ayodhya, Balrampur, Maharajganj, Sant Kabir Nagar, Deoria,
Kushinagar, Mau, Azamgarh, Ballia, Gorakhpur, Ambedkar Nagar, Bijnor,
Pilibhit, Badaun and Farrukhabad Districts are in the ‘very severe’ category
 The 17 Districts Ghazipur, Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Bulandshahr, Rampur,
Aligarh, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Banda, Shamli, Bareilly, Kasganj, Shahjahanpur,
Hardoi, Unnao, Lucknow, Prayagraj and Varanasi on the Ram Ganga and Ganga
River basins have been categorized in the ‘severe’ category
 Since the past couple of years, Jalaun, Chitrakoot and Hamirpur Districts of the
Bundelkhand region, which were known for drought, are also experiencing
sporadic floods
Vulnerability is high due to the topography and geometry of water channels. The
Vulnerability
two main reasons for floods include high precipitation and water logging.
Indicators
• Eastern Uttar Pradesh experiences 1,000–1,200 mm of rainfall annually. The
main reasons for floods include heavy rainfall, low gradient, high subsoil water
level, and silting of river beds. The Western parts of the State experience 600–
1,000 mm of rainfall annually, and because of poor drainage systems, face
flood like situations
• The bund structures are quite vintage and need extensive maintenance
• Heavy rainfall in Nepal and Uttarakhand cause downstream flooding in Uttar
Pradesh which is aggravated by lack of early warning and information sharing
 Economically weaker section people form a large section of the population of
Uttar Pradesh is and most live below the poverty line. When a disaster strikes,
the resilience to ‘Build Back Better’ is lower in the such population.
 The elderly account for 7.7 per cent of the total State population. Of this, 80 per
cent live in the rural areas and support their families in agricultural practices.
Flood exacerbates livelihood conditions of the elderly.
Health:
 Disruption of routine services including health infrastructure occur as the
health facilities are submerged in water or damaged during floods
 There is an increase in the number of cases and deaths from water-borne
37
 diseases such as cholera, dysentery, diarrhoea as a result of contaminated
water
 There is also an increase in the number of cases and deaths from vector-borne
diseases such as dengue, chikungunya and malaria
 Vulnerabilities are further exacerbated due to the ongoing COVID-19
pandemic
Nutrition:
 Crop damage results in reduced food availability. Food consumption of people
may be compromised
 There is a possibility of shortage in food supplies
 Anganwadi Centres (AWCs) in the flood-affected areas may be either
inaccessible or damaged, resulting in disruption of services that are provided
through the AWCs
Education:
 Schools may be inaccessible due to water logging
 Schools may be inundated resulting in closure
 Schools may be used as relief shelters resulting in disruption of education
 There may be a loss in the number of school days because of closure of schools
 Absenteeism may occur due to the inability to reach schools, or the need for
helping at home, or engaging in child labour or migration
 There may be an increase in school dropout rates
 Reading and learning materials may be damaged and result in children losing
interest in studies
WASH:
 Poor sanitary conditions may result in child morbidity and mortality
 Water quality may be an issue due to which water-borne diseases may
increase
Child Protection:
 Livelihoods of caregivers may be affected, resulting in an increase in child
labour, child abuse and trafficking
 There is a possibility of increased psychological stress among children
 There is a possibility of children drowning and losing their lives

Livelihood:
 There could be a possibility of people losing their livelihood and being pushed
into poverty
 Daily wagers may not be able to work during floods as their time is spent in
saving their own lives, property, household goods and livestock
 Agricultural losses may occur due to crop damage
 Loss of livestock affects the economy of rural communities

Gaps in Existing  Flood Atlas for the State is required to be prepared.

Capacities
 Enhanced set-up for real-time monitoring system of water level of the rivers
and reservoir levels is required.
 Enhanced set-up for early warning systems in the State for flood risks and
release of water from reservoirs to the people residing in low-lying areas needs

38
 to be established.
 Studies on flood zonation and river migration change of the major rivers are
lacking.
 Set-up for digital risk mapping for public information and research purposes is
required.
 Documentation and lessons learnt from major floods in the State on
management, prevention and mitigation measures needs upgradation.
 Studies on flood-related problems such as river course changes, agriculture
land and soil losses caused by flooding of rivers, and appropriate use of
embankments should be taken up.
 Studies on land use and hydrological changes relevant to flood management in
river basins and reservoir command areas should be entrusted to academic
institutions.
 Network of flood gauge and rainfall gauge in un-gauged flood-prone areas that
pose significant threat to at-risk communities needs to be set up.

 Geographic Information System (GIS)-based mapping of all the essential

services needed for rescue, response and relief phases viz. medical and health,
civil supply, WASH, shelter and other emergency services requires upgradation.
 Lack of Artificial Intelligence-based Decision Support Systems. The
SEOC/DEOCs should integrate latest scientific/technological tools for Decision
Support.
 Lack of coordination between early warning agencies like CWC, IMD, Irrigation
Department and RSAC.
 Strict enforcement regime for regulation on inhabitation of low-lying areas
along the rivers, canal and drains.
 Though, a Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (HRVCA) has been
undertaken for the State, this is quite traditional, and the changing climate
scenarios are not given due attention, nor are technological and scientific
studies taken into consideration for comprehensive HRVCA

5.3.2 Drought
“Drought is mainly caused due to variability of rainfall leading to rainfall deficiency and water
shortage”. 29 The impact, response, and interventions to such conditions would vary depending
on the point of time in a crop calendar when there is acute water or soil moisture deficit.
Generally, three situations are recognized:
i. Early season: delayed rainfall (delayed onset of monsoon), prolonged dry spells after
onset;
ii. Mid-season: inadequate soil moisture between two rain events; and
iii. Late season: early cessation of rains or insufficient rains.
The Indian Meteorological Department recognizes five drought situations:

29 NDMA. (2022). Retrieved 22 July 2022, from [Link]

39
 i. Drought Week, when the weekly rainfall is less than half of the normal;
ii. Agricultural Drought, when four drought weeks occur consecutively between mid-June
and September;
iii. Seasonal Drought, when seasonal rainfall is deficient by more than the standard
deviation from the normal;
iv. Drought Year, when annual rainfall is deficient by 20 per cent of the normal or more;
and
v. Severe Drought Year, when annual rainfall is deficient by 25 to 40 per cent of the normal
or more.
Drought can be devastating, as water supplies dry up, crops fail to grow, animals die, and
malnutrition and ill health become widespread.
History of Drought in Uttar Pradesh

Farming in Uttar Pradesh is mainly rain-fed

during the rainy season and irrigation-based
during the post-rainy season. However, in the
upland, during scanty rainfall, canals and tube
wells supplement water needs.

Uttar Pradesh faced droughts in 2002, 2004,

2006, 2007, 2009, 2014 and 2015. This resulted
in loss of crops, livestock and property. The
successive deficient rains in 2006 and 2007
caused calamitous conditions in the nine Figure 10: Precipitation Variability in Bundelkhand

southern Districts of the State comprising the Source: Journal article “Drought Identification and Trend
Bundelkhand and Vindhyan regions. Analysis Using Long-Term CHIRPS Satellite Precipitation
Product in Bundelkhand, India (2021)”

In 2015, the State faced severe drought conditions, in which almost 50 Districts were affected.
The State received 56 per cent less rainfall than normal during the monsoons. Due to scanty
rainfall, drought was declared in 50 Districts of Uttar Pradesh.

In 2016, eight Districts were affected: Lalitpur, Kanpur Nagar, Banda, Hamirpur, Chitrakoot,
Mahoba, Jalaun and Jhansi.

In 2018, five Districts were affected by drought: Lalitpur, Mahoba, Jhansi, Sonbhadra and
Mirzapur. The year-wise drought history is mentioned below.

Table 8: History of drought in Uttar Pradesh

Year No. of Names of Districts Affected

Districts
Affected

1979 9 Banda, Chitrakoot, Hamirpur, Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur, Mahoba, Mirzapur,

Sonbhadra

40
Year No. of Names of Districts Affected
Districts
Affected

2002 68 Agra, Aligarh, Allahabad, Ambedkar Nagar, Azamgarh, Budaun, Baghpat, Bahraich,
Ballia, Balrampur, Banda, Barabanki, Bareilly, Basti, Bijnor, Bulandshahr,
Chandauli, Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Ayodhya, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur,
Firozabad, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Gonda, Gorakhpur,
Hamirpur, Hardoi, Jalaun, Jaunpur, Jhansi, Jyotiba Phule Nagar, Kannauj, Kanpur
Nagar, Kanpur Dehat, Kaushambi, Lakhimpur Kheri, Kushinagar, Lalitpur,
Lucknow, Maharajganj, Mahoba, Mainpuri, Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Mirzapur,
Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Pilibhit, Pratapgarh, Raebareli, Rampur, Saharanpur,
Sant Kabir Nagar, Sant Ravi Das Nagar, Shahjahanpur, Shravasti, Siddharthnagar,
Sitapur, Sonbhadra, Sultanpur, Unnao, Varanasi

2004 60 Agra, Aligarh, Allahabad, Ambedkar Nagar, Auraiya, Azamgarh, Budaun, Baghpat,
Bahraich, Ballia, Balrampur, Banda, Barabanki, Basti, Bulandshahr, Chandauli,
Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Ayodhya, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Firozabad,
Gautam Buddh Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Gonda, Hamirpur, Hardoi, Jalaun,
Jaunpur, Jhansi, Kannauj, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur Dehat, Kaushambi, Lucknow,
Mahrajganj, Mahoba, Mainpuri, Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Mirzapur, Moradabad,
Muzaffarnagar, Pratapgarh, Raebareli, Saharanpur, Sant Kabir Nagar, Sant Ravi Das
Nagar, Shahjahanpur, Shravasti, Siddharthnagar, Sitapur, Sonbhadra, Sultanpur,
Unnao, Varanasi

2007 9 Banda, Chitrakoot, Hamirpur, Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur, Mahoba, Mirzapur,

Sonbhadra

2009 56 Agra, Aligarh, Allahabad, Ambedkar Nagar, Auraiya, Azamgarh, Budaun, Ballia,
Balrampur, Banda, Bareilly, Basti, Bijnor, Bulandshahr, Chandauli, Chitrakoot,
Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Ayodhya, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Firozabad, Gautam Buddh
Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Jalaun, Jaunpur, Jhansi, Jyotiba Phule Nagar, Kannauj,
Kanpur Nagar, Hamirpur, Kaushambi, Kushinagar, Lucknow, Lalitpur, Mahoba,
Mainpuri, Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Mirzapur, Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Pilibhit,
Raebareli, Rampur, Saharanpur, Sant Kabir Nagar, Shahjahanpur, Siddharthnagar,
Sitapur, Sultanpur, Unnao, Varanasi

2014 43 Agra, Aligarh, Amethi, Auraiya, Azamgarh, Budaun, Banda, Bareilly, Bulandshahr,
Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Ayodhya, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Firozabad,
Gautam Buddh Nagar, Ghaziabad, Hamirpur, Hapur, Hardoi, Jalaun, Jaunpur, Jhansi,
Kannauj, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur Dehat, Kaushambi, Kushinagar, Maharajganj,
Mahoba, Mainpuri, Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Muzaffarnagar, Pilibhit, Rampur,
Saharanpur, Shamli, Sonbhadra, Unnao

2015 50 Agra, Amethi, Allahabad, Ambedkarnagar, Auraiya, Baghpat, Ballia, Balrampur,

Banda, Barabanki, Basti, Chandauli, Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Firozabad,
Ayodhya, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur, Ghaziabad, Gonda, Gorakhpur, Hamirpur, Jalaun,
Jaunpur, Jhansi, Kannauj, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur Dehat, Kaushambi, Kushinagar,
Lalitpur, Lucknow, Mahoba, Maharajganj, Mainpuri, Mau, Mirzapur, Pilibhit,
Pratapgarh, Raebareli, Rampur, Sant Kabir Nagar, Sant Ravidas Nagar,
Shahjahanpur, Siddharthnagar, Sonbhadra, Sultanpur, Unnao

41
Year No. of Names of Districts Affected
Districts
Affected

2016 8 Mahoba, Chitrakoot, Banda, Jalaun, Jhansi, Lalitpur and Hamirpur and Kanpur
Nagar

2018 5 Mahoba, Lalitpur, Jhansi, Sonbhadra, Mirzapur

Source:

Severity of Drought in Uttar Pradesh

Many of the Districts were affected in the years 1979, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014, 2015, 2016
and 2018. The severity of drought in the Districts is reflected in Table 1.6.

Table 1.6: Districts Affected at least Five Times or more in the Period from 2002 to 2018

S. District Categories Number of Times Affected Year

No. during 2002 to 2018
1 Jhansi Severe 8 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016, 2018
2 Lalitpur Severe 8 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016, 2018
3 Mahoba Severe 8 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016, 2018
4 Hamirpur Severe 7 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016
5 Banda Severe 7 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016
6 Chitrakoot Severe 7 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016
7 Jalaun Severe 7 2002, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2014,
2015, 2016
8 Agra Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
9 Mainpuri Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
10 Etah Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
11 Fatehpur Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
12 Kaushambi Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
13 Sonbhadra Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2015, 2018
14 Mirzapur Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2015, 2018
15 Etawah Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
16 Kanpur Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
Dehat
17 Mathura Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015
18 Prayagraj Moderate 5 2002, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015

42
 Severe category – Affected 7 to 8 times between 2002 and 2018

Moderate category – Affected 5 times between 2002 and 2018

Mild category – Less than 5 times between 2002 and 2018

Figure 11: Drought-Affected Districts Experiencing Drought Five to Eight Times between 2002 and 2018

Primarily, the Bundelkhand region in Uttar Pradesh is affected by drought or drought-like

conditions. In this region, crops grown during the post-rainy season are usually based on
residual moisture conserved during the rainy season. Rainfall occurs both from Bengal and
South-West monsoons during the period from July to September each year.

Bundelkhand: Overview of Monsoons in 2018 Resulting in Drought

Bundelkhand is known as a drought-prone region. It comprises seven Districts of Uttar Pradesh.
Monsoon rains are of critical importance to this region. However, in the past several years, the
region has faced deficit rains leading to water scarcity, particularly for agriculture-related
activities. The situation of rainfall in 2018 is depicted in Table 1.7.

Table 1.7: Cumulative District-wise Rainfall Distribution in 2018

S. No. District Normal Rainfall Actual Rainfall Deficient %

(Jun–Sep) (Jun–Sep)
1 Banda 840.4 772.7 - 8%
2 Chitrakoot 885.9 911.3 3%
3 Hamirpur 796.9 810.4 2%
4 Jalaun 774.9 600.4 -23%
5 Jhansi 837.9 775.0 -8%
6 Lalitpur 939.3 835.5 -11%
7 Mahoba 776.4 340.4 -56%

Source IMD, 2021

43
Following the deviation in rainfall and other indices such as availability of water, the
Government of Uttar Pradesh declared seven Bundelkhand Districts as drought-affected in the
year 2018.

Socio-Economic Impact of Drought in Uttar Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh, with 29.43 per cent (one in four) of its population living below the poverty line,
is an agrarian State. Drought and its effect on agricultural outputs makes the poor vulnerable to
financial shocks, thereby leading to poverty traps. Inequality, a high in Uttar Pradesh and is a
major bottleneck to achieving national priorities. As per the NITI India Index 2020, Uttar
Pradesh was the poorest performer on Goal 11 (reduced inequalities). The State score was 41,
while the national score was 67.

Drought Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis

 Uttar Pradesh is divided into two meteorological sub-divisions: Uttar Pradesh
Hazard/Location
East and Uttar Pradesh West
 Since 2000, climate variability has been witnessed with a higher number of
Districts facing drought-like conditions
 The recurrence period of highly deficient rainfall in Bundelkhand region is
seven to eight times in 15 years
 The recurrence for the Districts in Vindhya region is five– to six times
between 2002 and 2018
 Chitrakoot, Banda, Hamirpur, Jhansi, Jalaun Lalitpur and Mahoba are severely
vulnerable to drought
 Agra, Etah, Etawah, Fatehpur, Kaushambi, Kanpur Dehat, Prayagraj, Mirzapur,
Mathura, Mainpur and Sonbhadra are moderately vulnerable to drought
 Overpopulation (relative to current productivity, income and natural
Vulnerability
resources) in Bundelkhand and Vidhya region
 Debilitated ecological base leading to land degradation and fragmentation
due to excessive use of quarrying and mining
• High dependence on climate-sensitive sectors: agriculture, forestry, fisheries
• High number of dark zones for ground water
Social:
Risk
 Damage to crops results in a greater number of farmers slipping below
the poverty line
 Population without access to (improved) sanitation and water supply
 Low access to fodder for animals during drought
 Loss of crop affects the livelihood of the farmers and leads to large-scale
migration
Economic:
 Loss of crops, leads to reduced purchasing power among the farmers,
which leads to economic losses
Health and Nutrition:
 Crop damage and loss of livelihoods leads to food insecurity affecting
nutritional status and health of children
 Distance to. health centres leads to difficulty of access during extreme
weather conditions

44
  Water contamination causes water-borne diseases such as jaundice and
diarrhoea among children and other vulnerable groups
 Shortage of food may lead to an increase in malnourishment and under-
nourishment of people
Education:
 School education is affected and the percentage of dropouts increases.
Either children migrate with their parents or they contribute to the
household income as child labour
 Mid-day meals are affected
 Schools can be closed due to unavailability of safe drinking water
 Poor sanitary conditions
 Adolescent girls dropout of schools and participate in household work
WASH:
 Unavailability of safe drinking water affects people and livestock
 Poor sanitary conditions
 Children and women walk longer distances to draw water for household
consumption
Child protection:
 Child trafficking and child abuse increase because of migration of parents
or need for additional income

 Low level of awareness among farmers on social protection schemes

Gap in Existing
such as Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY)
Capacities
 Lack of technical know-how on monitoring of rainfall and water
resources at ground level
 Lack of drought forecast, and assessment of water deficit, drought-prone,
and dryland farming areas
 Lack of awareness on water conservation methods such as rainwater
harvesting
 Limited resources for institution-building specific to drought mitigation
and response
 Lack of availability of less water-intensive seeds
 Lack of awareness among farmers on crop rotation methods
 Lack of proper repair of dysfunctional water sources
 Inadequate Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) for managing any outbreak of
water-borne diseases
 Inadequate guidelines for hiring private tankers in case of inadequate
availability of Government tankers
 Inadequate establishment of fodder banks at strategic locations using
improved fodder/feed storage methods for supply of fodder to deficit
areas
 Inadequate pilot studies in drought-prone areas for suggesting long-term
mitigation measures
 Lack of programme convergence on lessons learnt from studies carried
out by various research institutions
 Inadequate promotion and subsidy on water-efficient irrigation systems
(sprinklers, drip, etc.)
 Lack of tracking mechanism on village-level information systems for
natural resource management
 Inadequate coverage on credit and financing products relevant to the
45
 drought-prone areas

5.3.3 Earthquake
Uttar Pradesh falls under the four seismic zones – II, III and IV – according to the maximum
intensity of earthquake expected. A major part of the State falls under zones III and IV.
Earthquake Zones in Uttar Pradesh

Figure 12: Earthquake Zone Map of Uttar Pradesh

Source: BMPTC Vulnerability Atlas of India (2019)

46
List of Districts of Uttar Pradesh in Earthquake Seismic Zones II to IV
Table 1.8: List of Districts of Uttar Pradesh in Earthquake Seismic Zones II to IV

Districts Districts partly Districts Districts partly Districts

S.
completely in in Zones IV and completely in in Zones II and completely in
No.
Zone IV III Zone III III Zone II

1 Amroha Aligarh Ambedkar Nagar Agra Banda

2 Baghpat Bahraich Ayodhya Amethi Chitrakoot

3 Balrampur Ballia Azamgarh Auraiya Hamirpur

4 Bijnor Bareilly Barabanki Etawah Jalaun

5 Bulandshahr Basti Chandauli Fatehpur Jhansi

Gautam Buddha
6 Budaun Etah Firozabad Kaushambi
Nagar

7 Ghaziabad Deoria Farrukhabad Kanpur Dehat Lalitpur

8 Hapur Gonda Ghazipur Kanpur Nagar Mahoba

9 Kushinagar Gorakhpur Hardoi Mainpuri

10 Maharajganj Lakhimpur Kheri Hathras Mirzapur

11 Meerut Mathura Jaunpur Pratapgarh

12 Moradabad Pilibhit Kannauj Prayagraj

13 Muzaffarnagar Shahjahanpur Kasganj Raebareli

Sant Ravidas
14 Rampur Sitapur Lucknow
Nagar

15 Saharanpur Sant Kabir Nagar Mau

16 Sambhal Sonbhadra

17 Shamali Sultanpur

18 Shravasti Unnao

19 Siddharthnagar Varanasi

Source: BMTPC Vulnerability Atlas of India (2019)

47
History of Earthquakes in Uttar Pradesh, Including Bordering States
The history of earthquakes in Uttar Pradesh, including bordering States, is provided in Table 1.9.
Uttarakhand was carved out of Uttar Pradesh in 2000.
Table 1.9 Earthquake History of Uttar Pradesh

Year Epicentre Magnitude No. of Districts Damage

Affected
1 Sep Chamoli 7.0 Chamoli and other 200–300 deaths
1803 Districts
28 Western Nepal 7.3 Dharchula NA
Aug
1916
6 Nov Raebareli- 6.0 Raebareli and NA
1925 Sultanpur Sultanpur
District Border
15 Jan India-Nepal 8.0 Eastern Uttar 10,500
1934 Border Region Pradesh,
Allahabad,
Lucknow
8 Nov Nepal 6.0 Bahraich-Gonda NA
1952
10 Oct Jahangirpur 6.2 Bulandshahr NA
1956
27 Ghagot, Haryana 6.0 Gurgaon- 50 deaths
Aug Faridabad
1960
24 Salkot, Nepal 6.0 Pilibhit and NA
Dec Lakhimpur Kheri
1961
1 Jun Sant Kabir Nagar 5.7 Gorakhpur and NA
1965 Basti
15 Sep Raunda 5.8 Moradabad NA
1966 Mustahkam
29 Jul Surma, Nepal 6.8 Pithoragarh The quake also caused damage in
1980 Pithoragarh area, nearly 50 km away
from the epicentre. About 13 persons
were killed here and 40 were injured.
21 Oct Uttarkashi 6.8 Uttarkashi and Reported number of deaths: 768
1991 Uttar Pradesh Number of people affected: 0.4 million

29 Gopeshwar 5.8 Chamoli NA

Mar
1999
18 Oct Gautam Buddh 3.8 Gautam Buddh Nil
2007 Nagar Nagar
26 Apr Barpak, Nepal 7.3 Entire Uttar Nil
2015 Pradesh
Source: ASC, Seismicity of Uttar Pradesh ([Link]

48
Earthquake Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis
Many Districts of the State are in seismic zones IV and III. Although the Government of Uttar
Pradesh has amended its building bye-laws and codes to incorporate earthquake safety features
in buildings, the compliance mechanisms for the implementation of these bye-laws needs
stricter enforcement.
Hazard/Location  Surrounded by various fault lines and ridges
 Beneath Uttar Pradesh, runs the Delhi-Haridwar ridge, North Jahangirpur
East-South South-West along New Delhi to the Garhwal region. The Delhi-
Muzaffarnagar ridge, which goes from East to West, runs from New Delhi to
Kathgodam in Nepal
 Amroha, Baghpat, Balrampur, Bijnor, Bulandshahr, G.B. Nagar, Ghaziabad,
Hapur, Kushinagar, Maharajganj, Meerut, Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Rampur,
Saharanpur, Sambhal, Shamli, Shravasti and Siddharthnagar lie in the high-
damage risk zone IV
Vulnerabilities  Dilapidated and un-retrofitted lifeline infrastructure
 High-rise buildings are vulnerable based on their structural type, material
used, maintenance, etc.
 Elevated corridors and old flyovers/bridges remain vulnerable during an
earthquake, unless their structural safety is ensured.
 Major railway lines pass through the State and old railway bridges are more
vulnerable.
Risks  Houses made of mud, unburnt brick walls, burnt brick walls and stone walls
are vulnerable to earthquake
 Collapse of public infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, AWCs may result
in disruption of services
 Collapse of buildings will result in accidents and maybe deaths
 Disruption of water and electricity supply
 Fire outbreaks may occur
 In case of damage in and around Narora nuclear reactor, possibility of death of
people or long-term health risks among people living in areas close by
 Oil refinery in Mathura lies in seismic zone IV. This area is highly vulnerable
 There may be an increase in psychological stress and trauma for prolonged
periods

Health:
 Disruption of routine services in case health centres/hospitals are damaged
or inaccessible
 Increase in number of cases and deaths from water-borne diseases such as
cholera, dysentery or diarrhoea as a result of contaminated water
 Increase in the number of cases and deaths from vector-borne diseases such
as dengue, chikungunya, malaria, etc.
 Supply systems for essential services may be affected

Nutrition:
 AWCs may be damaged or inaccessible
 Food supplies may be short in a post-earthquake scenario

Education:
 Schools may be closed due to damage or inaccessibility
49
  Closure of schools may lead to loss in number of school days
 Inability to reach schools or need for helping at home or engaging in child
labour or migration may lead to absenteeism

WASH:
 Poor sanitary conditions may result in child morbidity and mortality
 Water supply and quality may be an issue in a post-earthquake scenario
Child Protection:
 Livelihood of caregivers may be affected
 Child labour, child abuse and child trafficking may increase
 Increased psychological stress among children may occur

Power supply:
 Damage in transmission lines and power sources may affect power supply
Short circuits may lead to major fire incidents Gas pipeline:
 Gas pipeline may get damaged and create a major hazard to locals

Oil refinery:
 Oil refinery may be damaged and cause loss of lives or lifelong health
effects

Nuclear reactor in Narora:

 Nuclear reactor may be damaged resulting in loss of lives or lifelong
health effects

Gaps in Existing
• Lack of awareness of seismic knowledge and implications among the
Capacities
communities.
• Inadequate data on disaster damage and loss.
• Lack of studies on vulnerabilities and capacities covering social, physical,
economic, ecological, gender, social inclusion and equity aspects
• Remote sensing-based studies that can provide inputs for micro-seismic
zonation should be taken up.
• Inadequate capacities for implementing robust mechanisms for
monitoring construction of earthquake-resilient houses.
• Lower level of compliance to relevant building codes in high-rise
buildings.
• Moderate level of compliance to adoption of building bye-laws for rural
and urban areas.
• Lack of adequate number of trainings and orientation sessions of the
State Government staff, and other direct stakeholders such as civil society,
media persons, elected representatives and professionals on earthquake
preparedness and response measures
• Structured random audits needs to be carried out for high-rise
multistoried buildings
• Lack of knowledge related to earthquakes and seismicity among common
people

50
 5.3.4 Fire
Fire is the most frequent disaster in urban as well as rural areas. Rapid urbanization,
overcrowding and unregulated commercial activities are frequently responsible for urban fires.
Also, unplanned structures and improper electrical installations lead to fire events in urban
areas.
In Uttar Pradesh, a majority of the population lives in rural areas and many of them still live in
thatched roof houses. During the summer season, fire incidents are very common because of the
use of fossil fuel for cooking purposes and behaviours such as throwing of cigarette butts and
bidis in the fields. Also, electrical short circuits during the summer season may result in fires in
fields having crops that are ready to be harvested.

Major Fire Incidents in Uttar Pradesh

Sr. Year Place Losses/Damage Incurred
No
1 April 2006 Brand India Fair, Meerut 65 dead and 150 injured
2 December 2010 Wooden Seasoning Plant, Mathura Property worth INR 2 crores
damaged
3 April 2013 Dargah Fire, Bahraich 80 shops gutted in fire
4 June 2015 Goyal Residency, Pratapgarh 10 killed and 13 injured
5 June 2015 Sitapur 100 houses gutted in fire, 1 dead
6 October 2015 Sabzi Mandi, Banda 400 shops gutted in fire
7 May 2017 Bus Fire, Banda 4 killed and 20 injured
8 March 2017 Glass Factory Fire, Rasulpur, 1 killed and 12 injured
Firozabad
9 May 2017 Pandav Nagar Chemical Factory, NA
Ghaziabad
10 November 2017 Thermal Power Plant Fire and Blast, 43 dead and 100 injured
Unchahar
11 January 2018 BRD Hospital, Gorakhpur -
12 May 2018 Anpara thermal Power Plant,
Sonbhadra -
13 May 2018 Godown Fire, Allahabad -
14 October 2018 Obra Thermal Power Plant, Sonbhadra -

15 September 2020 Chemical Factory, Agra -

16 March 2021 Fire Godown, Colonelganj, Kanpur Plastic godown gutted
17 April 2021 JJ Cluster, Gautam Buddha Nagar 2 killed and 50 shanties gutted in
fire

Source: Information collated from various media articles

Fire Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis

 Industrial units, thatched houses, shopping malls, LPG godowns/petrol
Hazard/Location

51
 pumps, industries, chemical handling units

 In the summer season, thatched houses are highly prone to fire

 Loss of livestock in fire incidents makes the situation worse as it
contributes to a large part of the rural economy
 Usually, fire destroys the entire crop and causes massive economic loss
as most of the rural economy is based on agriculture
Vulnerability Indicators  Congested urban areas and unplanned urbanization has enhanced fire
vulnerability in cities
 Highly populous settlements living in thatched huts or huts made with
plastic sheets
 Non-adherence of building bye-laws in commercial and industrial units

 Unauthorized electricity connections

 Community in the vicinity of the industrial units may be exposed to fire
events
 Hospitals, schools, business units, which work on electrical supply
systems
 Thatched houses, huts and mud houses with tin sheds could be damaged
Risks in fire
 Infrastructure could be disrupted, such as electric power, water supply
system, etc.
 Structures such as glass and plastic could be damaged due to heat and
temperature released during the chemical and industrial events
 Agriculture land could be impacted due to fire events
 Lack of penetration of Fire Stations across the State
 Lack of trained Firemen, Sub Officers in all the Fire Stations
 Lack of Systematic data management on disaster damage and loss
assessments and reporting of relief granted in various cases
 Lack of online information system on Hazardous Chemical (Codes)
(HAZCHEM) conforming to national standards
 Lack of State-specific Fire Incident Reporting System in Districts for fire
events with specific features and response provided to understand the
type of risk for other events
 Lack of system of simulation of worst-case scenarios for industrial units
 Lack of Action Plan for modernization and meeting future needs
Gaps in Existing  Lack of equipment for firefighting, urban search and rescue as per the
Capacities requirements
 Lack of trained women staff in Government response task forces,
volunteers and specialized division
 Inadequate documentation of lessons learnt from major fire events in the
State on management, prevention and mitigation measures
 Inadequate number of training programmes on various aspects such as
firefighting, managing collapsed structure, and search and rescue
 Lack of GIS-based mapping of all the essential services needed for rescue,
response and relief phases viz. medical and health, civil supply, WASH,
shelter and other emergency services
 Lack of proper mock drills on a regular basis
 Low level of fire alarm systems coverage from various industrial and

52
 residential buildings
 Low level of individual protection equipment in public buildings with
 At almost all levels, inability to handle firefighting equipment
 Lack of random audits for high-rise multistoried buildings

5.3.5 Lightning and Thunderstorm

Lightning and thunderstorm are other major hazards in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Not only
does lightning result in loss of human and animal lives, but it can also result in forest fires as
well as local and large-scale power cuts that can damage the communication and electrical
systems including computers other electrical appliances.

A thunderstorm is usually accompanied by lightning and squall, and causes heavy to very heavy
disruption. Electrocution, wall/roof collapse, flying heavy objects due to high-speed wind and
tree felling, etc. during a thunderstorm and lightning event are the main causes for human and
animal life loss and property damage.

In the Annual Lightning Report 2021-2230, the Climate Resilient Observing Systems Promotion
Council counted over 3 lakh cloud-to-ground lightning strikes in Uttar Pradesh. In Uttar Pradesh
lightning strikes are fewer as compared to other States, but mortality figures remain high
among the affected States.

 Lightning Vulnerability in Uttar Pradesh

Though the data on zoning of lightning strikes is available at the State level, no micro-zonation
data on lightning strikes is available at the District level. Therefore, vulnerability is defined
using the lightning strike and number of causalities.

The graph given below shows a decline over the years in causalities reported. This in turn
points towards better preparedness in the State for lightning hazard.

30 CROPC. (2022). Annual Lightning Report 2021-22 (Executive Summary) [Ebook]. New Delhi. Retrieved
from [Link]
2022%20(5).pdf
53
Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

 Western Uttar Pradesh

The number of deaths in Western Uttar Pradesh is less than 10 per cent of the total deaths
reported in the State (see Table 1.10). In 2019–2020, only 30 of 391 reported mortalities were
in Western Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, in 2020–2021, 33 of 369 and in 2021–2022, 19 of 280
deaths were reported in this region. A majority of those deaths were reported from the Agra,
Aligarh and Bareilly Divisions of the State.

Table 1.10: Deaths due to Lightning in Western Uttar Pradesh

Lightning Lightning Lightning

S. No. Division District
(2019–2020) (2020–2021) (2021–2022)
Agra Agra 2 4 0
1
Firozabad 3 3 7
2
Mainpuri 2 3 2
3
Mathura 3 2 1
4
Aligarh Aligarh 0 4 1
5
Etah 0 0 2
6
Hathras 2 0 0
7
Kasganj 0 4 0
8
Bareilly Bareilly 1 3 0
9
Badaun 3 1 0
10
Pilibhit 1 0 2
11
Shahjahanpur 7 1 2
12
13 Meerut Meerut 2 0 0
Bulandshahr 0 2 0
14
G.B. Nagar 0 0 1
15
Ghaziabad 0 0 0
16
Hapur 0 0 0
17
Bagpat 0 0 0
18
Moradabad Moradabad 0 0 0
19
Amroha 1 0 0
20
Bijnor 2 3 0
21
Sambhal 0 1 0
22
Rampur 0 0 0
23
Saharanpur Saharanpur 0 0 0
24
Muzaffarnagar 1 1 0
25

54
 Shamli 0 1 1
26
Total 30 33 19

Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

 Central Uttar Pradesh

The number of deaths in Central Uttar Pradesh is less than 20 per cent of the total deaths
reported annually in the State. In 2019–2020, 79 of 391 reported mortalities were in Central
Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, in 2020–2021, 57 of 369 and in 2021–2022, 39 of 280 were reported in
this region. A majority of these deaths were reported in the Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur Dehat,
Lucknow, Hardoi, and Lakhimpur Kheri of the Kanpur and Lucknow Divisions of Uttar Pradesh.

Table 1.11: Deaths due to Lightning in Central Uttar Pradesh

Lightning Lightning Lightning

[Link]. Division District
(2019–2020) (2020–2021) (2021–2022)

1 Kanpur Kanpur Nagar 11 0 0

2 Etawah 2 2 0
3 Farrukhabad 3 0 5
4 Kanpur Dehat 6 8 7
5 Auraiya 1 0 3
6 Kannauj 2 2 1
7 Lucknow Lucknow 1 1 0
8 Hardoi 9 3 1
9 Lakhimpur Kheri 7 3 0
10 Raebareli 7 8 6
11 Sitapur 9 1 3
12 Unnao 2 9 4
13 Ayodhya Ayodhya 1 1 1
14 Barabanki 4 2 1
15 Ambedkar Nagar 4 9 1
16 Sultanpur 7 6 2
17 Amethi 3 2 1
Total 79 57 36

Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

 North-Eastern Uttar Pradesh

The number of deaths in North-Eastern Uttar Pradesh is around 19 per cent of the total deaths
reported in the State. In 2019–2020, 55 of 391 reported mortalities were in this region.
Similarly, in 2020-21, 89 of 369 reported mortalities and in year 2021-22, 51 of 280 reported

55
mortalities were in North-Eastern Uttar Pradesh. A majority of these deaths were reported in
the Azamgarh and Gorakhpur Divisions of Uttar Pradesh.

56
 Table 1.12: Deaths due to Lightning in North-Eastern Uttar Pradesh

S. Lightning Lightning (2020– Lightning (2021–

Division District
No. (2019–2020) 2021) 2022)
1 Azamgarh 9 7 9
2 Azamgarh Ballia 7 22 6
3 Mau 6 2 2
4 Basti 0 6 10
5 Basti Sant Kabir Nagar 2 3 5
6 Siddharthnagar 3 3 3
7 Gorakhpur 6 11 4
8 Deoria 11 16 4
Gorakhpur
9 Kushinagar 5 8 3
10 Maharajganj 1 1 0
11 Bahraich 2 1 2
12 Balrampur 3 5 2
Devipatan
13 Gonda 0 4 1
14 Shravasti 0 0 0
Total 55 89 51

Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

 South-Eastern Uttar Pradesh

South-Eastern Uttar Pradesh is the hotspot of lightning hits in the State. The highest number of
deaths were reported in 5 of 18 Divisions of Uttar Pradesh. The number of deaths in South-
Eastern Uttar Pradesh is around 55 per cent of the total deaths reported in the State. In 2019–
2022, 227 of 391 reported mortalities were in this region. Similarly, in 2020–2021, 148 of 369
reported mortalities and in 2021–2022, 174 of 280 reported mortalities were in this region. A
majority of these deaths were reported in the Mirzapur, Chitrakoot and Prayagraj Divisions.
Mirzapur Division itself accounts for around 20 per cent of the total deaths reported between
2019 and 2022.

Table 1.13: Deaths due to Lightning in South-Eastern Uttar Pradesh

Lightning Lightning Lightning

[Link]. Division District
(2019–2020) (2020–2021) (2021–2022)

1 Prayagraj 15 29 31
2 Fatehpur 17 14 7
Prayagraj
3 Kaushambi 9 9 5
4 Pratapgarh 8 5 4
5 Mirzapur Mirzapur 28 27 22

57
 Lightning Lightning Lightning
[Link]. Division District
(2019–2020) (2020–2021) (2021–2022)

Sant Ravidas
6 3 6 2
Nagar (Bhadohi)

7 Sonbhadra 37 35 37
8 Varanasi 4 2 1
9 Gazipur 7 16 11
Varanasi
10 Jaunpur 9 13 2
11 Chandauli 12 12 3
12 Chitrakoot 11 6 5
13 Banda 12 2 2
Chitrakoot
14 Hamirpur 13 1 7
15 Mahoba 6 3 8
16 Jhansi 7 1 11
17 Jhansi Jalaun 10 2 0
18 Lalitpur 19 7 16
Total 227 190 174

Source: Data compiled from Relief Commissioner’s Office, Government of Uttar Pradesh, 2022

 Lightning Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis

Although all Districts of Uttar Pradesh are prone to lightning strikes, but in the
Hazard/Location last few years the districts – Prayagraj, Mirzapur, Sonbhadra, Ghazipur and
Lalitpur, have reported high number of lightning-related deaths.
• Thatched/tin shed huts/houses.
• Lack of impact based early warning system.
• Open field where people take shelter under trees when it is raining.
• Houses without lightning arresters surrounded by a number of trees
Vulnerabilities • Houses surrounded by trees
• Lack of awareness/knowledge, dos and don’ts, etc. in the context of
lightning
• Non-availability of covered structures/lightning shelters in the open fields
• Farming activities during monsoons
• Mud houses with tin shed fire.
• Shelters with galvanized roofs.
• Farmers in fields.
• Women working in open, children in open fields.
• Critical facilities such as schools, Primary Health Centres (PHCs),
Risks
Community Health Centres (CHCs), AWCs without lightning arrestors.
• Fire as the secondary effect of lightning.
• Animal grazing in open fields or taking shelter under tin sheds without
lightning arrestor.
• Disruption of electric power, water supply system, etc.

58
 • Structures such as glass and plastic which could be damaged.
• Vehicles parked outside.
• Fishing activity during rains.
• Bathing and other domestic activities near ponds/water bodies during
rains/rainy clouds/thunderstorms.

 Lack of lightning arrestors in houses especially in rural areas.

 Lack of lightning arrestors in public/sensitive buildings.
 Lack of common alert protocols for lightning warnings in the District/State.

Existing Capacity  Lack of knowledge among the population on do’s and don’ts
Gaps  Lack of knowledge/awareness about lightning arrestors among the common
masses.
 Lack of mechanism for real-time alerts to the last man.
 Lack of lightning shelters in the State (particularly in and around
agricultural fields)

5.3.6 Hailstorm
Hailstorms cause substantial damage to standing crops as well as to horticultural crops within a
very short period of time. Uttar Pradesh experiences unseasonal rains and hailstorms mostly
from February to April. However, in the contemporary period hailstorms have occurred as early
as in January and even in late period of May.31
In March 2015, heavy rains accompanied by a hailstorm damaged wheat, sugarcane and oilseed
crops across thousands of hectares in the State. Hence, there is now a pressing need for
hailstorm prediction followed by mitigation, recovery and risk reduction measures after a
hailstorm strike.

 History of Hailstorms in Uttar Pradesh

Year No. of Names of Affected Districts

Affected
Districts

2014 15 Agra, Allahabad, Banda, Chitrakoot, Firozabad, Hamirpur, Jalaun, Jhansi, Kanpur
Dehat, Kasganj, Kaushambi, Lalitpur, Mahoba, Mathura, Pratapgarh
2015 73 Agra, Aligarh, Allahabad, Ambedkar Nagar, Auraiya, Azamgarh, Badaun, Baghpat,
Bahraich, Ballia, Banda, Barabanki, Bareilly, Sambhal, Bulandshahr, Chandauli,
Amethi, Chitrakoot, Deoria, Etah, Etawah, Faizabad, Farrukhabad, Fatehpur,
Firozabad, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghazipur, Gorakhpur, Hamirpur,
Hardoi, Hathras, Jalaun, Jaunpur, Jhansi, Amroha, Kannauj, Kanpur Nagar, Kasganj,
Kaushambi, Kushinagar, Lakhimpur Kheri, Lalitpur, Lucknow, Mahoba, Mainpuri,
Mathura, Mau, Meerut, Mirzapur, Moradabad, Muzaffarnagar, Hapur, Pilibhit,
Shamli, Pratapgarh, Raebareli, Kanpur Dehat, Rampur, Saharanpur, Bhadohi,
Shahjahanpur, Sitapur, Sonbhadra, Sultanpur, Unnao, Varanasi, Basti, Mahrajganj,

31CHATTOPADHYAY, N., DEVI, S., JOHN, G., & CHOUDHARI, V. (2017). Occurrence of hail storms and strategies to minimize its effec t
on crops. MAUSAM, 68(1), 75-92. doi: 10.54302/mausam.v68i1.435
59
 Year No. of Names of Affected Districts
Affected
Districts
Gonda, Siddharthnagar, Shravasti, Sant Kabir Nagar
2018 36 Agra, Azamgarh, Aligarh, Ballia, Banda, Barabanki, Bijnor, Faizabad, Firozabad,
Gonda, Hapur, Hardoi, Jalaun, Jaunpur, Kushinagar, Kasganj, Lakhimpur Khiri,
Lalitpur, Mathura, Mirzapur, Raebareli, Shahjahanpur, Sant Kabir Nagar,
Sonbhadra, Unnao, Basti, Etawah, Jhansi, Kannauj, Kanpur Nagar, Lucknow,
Sambhal, Sitapur, Varanasi, Mahoba, Bulandshahr
2020 60 Agra, Firozabad, Mathura, Aligarh, Etah, Kasganj, Prayagraj, Fatehpur, Kaushambi,
Pratapgarh, Azamgarh, Ballia, Mau, Bareilly, Badaun, Pilibhit, Shahjahanpur, Sant
Kabir Nagar, Siddharthnagar, Chitrakoot, Bahraich, Balrampur, Gonda, Ayodhya,
Barabanki, Ambedkar Nagar, Sultanpur, Amethi, Gorakhpur, Deoria, Jhansi, Jalaun,
Kanpur Nagar, Etawah,, Farrukhabad, Kanpur Dehat, Auraiya, Kannauj, Lucknow,
Hardoi, Lakhimpur Kheri, Sitapur, Unnao, Meerut, Bulandshahr, Gautam Buddh
Nagar, Hapur, Mirzapur, Sant Ravidas Nagar, Sonbhadra, Moradabad, Amroha,
Sambhal, Saharanpur, Muzaffar Nagar, Shamli, Varanasi, Ghazipur, Jaunpur,
Chandauli
Source: Hailstorm memorandum (2014, 2015, 2018, 2020) Relief Commissioner Office, Government of Uttar
Pradesh

District-wise analysis of the above data shows that the Mathura District is the most hailstorm-
affected District, followed by Agra, Ballia, Banda, Barabanki Chitrakoot, Jalaun, Kanpur Dehat,
Lalitpur, Mirzapur, Shahjahanpur. With an increase in the number of affected Districts and the
changing climatic conditions, there is a high possibility of more Districts getting affected due to
hailstorms in the future.

 Hailstorm Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis

Hazard/Location Most Districts of Uttar Pradesh

Due to high exposure and constrained access to resources, homeless, people

Vulnerabilities living in kutchha houses, low-income population, farmers and farm labour are
vulnerable.

 Damage to critical facilities such as schools, PHCs, CHCs, AWCs.

 Warehouses.
 Disruption of services such as electricity supply and water supply.

 Glass structures.
Risks  Pre-fabricated structures.

 Fire as the secondary effect of lightning.

 Vehicles parked outside.

 Agriculture including horticulture, poultry, dairy farms.

 Fish ponds.

60
  Lack of proper systems for data collection, maintenance, and monitoring
of Hailstorm events.
 Lack of systematic means for the dissemination of early warnings
received from Indian Meteorological Department (IDM) to the public at
large.
 Lack of awareness among farmers on how to save crops from a
Gaps in Existing Hailstorm.
Capacities
 Lack of awareness among farmers about crop and livestock insurance
schemes and programmes.
 Lack of training and community awareness campaigns for ‘at-risk’
communities.
 Lack of research studies related to hailstorm models and techniques to
improve storm forecasting among communities.

5.3.7 Industrial and Chemical Disasters

Being the second-largest economy in India, Uttar Pradesh has a diverse industrial profile,
ranging from mineral processing plants in Vindhyan region, bauxite-based aluminum plants
in Bundelkhand region, cottage industries in Varanasi and Lucknow, leather industries in
Agra and Kanpur, as well as the largest gold market of Asia in Meerut. Apart from this, the
Uttar Pradesh-Delhi NCR and Lucknow-Kanpur corridors have thriving electronics
industries. The state also holds distinction in being the largest exporter of sports items and
musical instruments.
A total of 2,456 hazardous factories are in 38 Districts of the State. As per the Chemical
Accidents (Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Response) Rules (1996), Districts Crisis
Groups in all the 38 Districts have been constituted under the chairmanship of the District
Magistrate of respective Districts. Of these, 118 are identified as Major Accident Hazard
(MAH) units.32

32 List of 118 MAH units in Uttar Pradesh

61
 Figure 12: Number of MAH Units and Manufacturing in Uttar Pradesh
Source: [Link]

Further, the State also has the largest nuclear power plant, the Narora Atomic Power Station,
which can be hazardous if there is a release of radiation in the periphery of the power plant.

62
  Industrial and Chemical Disasters Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity
Analysis
Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur Dehat, Auraiya, Etawah, Jhansi, Lalitpur, Farrukhabad,
Lucknow, Barabanki, Unnao, Lakhimpur Kheri, Ayodhya, Sultanpur, Gonda,
Hazard/Location Gorakhpur, Deoria, Prayagraj, Varanasi, Chandauli, Sonbhadra, Bareilly,
Shahjahanpur, Badaun, Agra, Mathura, Aligarh, Hathras, Firozabad, Meerut,
Bulandshahr, Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Moradabad, Amroha, Rampur, Bijnor,
Ghaziabad, Gautam Buddh Nagar
Vulnerabilities  People residing near MAH units.
 Those working in MAH units.
 Unskilled labour on daily wages in the MAH units.

 Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) stored in the MAH units.

 Long-term health effects.
 Flora and fauna may get affected (contamination of water bodies and
Risks fishing ponds).
 Loss of life and property in case of a blast.
 Fire can be a secondary hazard leading to loss of life and property.

 Loss of livelihood for labour in case the plant(s) is closed.

Gaps in Existing  Inadequate compliance with mandatory safety certification of industries.

Capacities
 Inadequate regulatory mechanism on land-use plan
 Low level of training activities (exercises, simulations) on-site and off-site.
 Low level of planning and execution of emergency drills by all the
industries.
 Lack of awareness on how to safeguard people in case of any gas release.
 Inadequate number of community alert systems across various units.

 Inadequate number of emergency shelters as compared to the number of

people.
 Inadequate provision of individual protection equipment to those working
inside the plants.
 Lack of on-site and off-site safety standards in MAH units.
 Lack of proper understanding of HAZCHEM.

 Lack of simulation systems for worst-case scenarios in all chemical and

industrial units related to the release of various chemicals.
 Lack of GIS-based emergency planning and response system for chemical
accidents in major industrial clusters.
 Lack of mechanisms for warning dissemination to public on do’s and don’ts
during chemical disasters.
 Lack of coordination mechanisms with the line departments on the

63
 dissemination of warnings to all, down to the last mile.
 Lack of private participation/NGOs in enhancing off-site disaster response
and risk management
 Need for strict enforcements such as audits and inspections.

64
5.3.8 Stampede
Stampedes have been identified as a major hazard that could occur during mass gathering
events.

 History of Stampedes in the State

Table1.12: History of Stampedes in the State (1954–2004)33

Year Location Area Affected Damage

1954 Kumbh Mela, Allahabad Reported number of deaths: 800
2004 Chandrashekhar Park, Allahabad Reported number of deaths: 21
Number of people injured: 21
2007 Mughal Sarai Railway Station Reported number of deaths: 16
Number injured: 40
2010 Ram Janki Temple of the Kripalu Maharaj Reported number of deaths: 63
Ashram in Kunda, Pratapgarh Number injured: 100
2011 Radha Rani Temple of Barsana, Mathura, Uttar Reported number of deaths: 02
Pradesh Number injured: 12
2012 Hanuman Temple in Panki, Reported number of deaths: 01
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh Number injured: 12
2013 Kumbh Mela, Allahabad Reported number of deaths: 36
2014 Chitrakoot Reported number of deaths: 10
2016 Varanasi Reported number of deaths: 24
Number injured: 50

 Vulnerabilities in Stampede
Sectors Vulnerabilities

 Vulnerable groups and individuals viz. women, elderly,

Social children, differently- abled, etc.

 Congested routes in social/religious gathering places,

temples.
 Lack of alternative routes in the areas.
 Dilapidated religious structures.
Physical
 Criss-cross pathways.
 Crowded railway stations and religious places.
 Mass gatherings such as rallies, celebrations, festivals.
 Market places/weekend heavy rush markets.

33 Source: UPSDMP 2018-19

65
  Lack of systematic risk assessment with understanding of
crowd size, flow rate and flow capacity in crowded places.
 Inefficient deployment of staff and resources.
 Lack of proper planning and management.
 Lack of adequate training and mock drills.
 Lack of proper crowd management plan, including
announcement system.

Existing Capacity Gaps  Lack of inter-agency coordination leading to unclear

chain of command and supervision.
 Improper communication plan for crowd size, flow
capacity understanding, problems arising at the tail end
of the crowd.
 Lack of proper communication plan and inefficient use of
available resources, such as aerial platforms.
 No integration of community resources, NGOs and
professionals in response effort.

5.3.9 Epidemics
Uttar Pradesh is highly vulnerable to diseases such as Japanese Encephalitis (JE), Acute
Encephalitis Syndrome (AES), dengue, swine flu (H1N1), malaria, measles, etc. Since 2020, the
State has been experiencing waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. From March 2020 till January
2022, a total of 19.7 lakhs COVID cases have been reported. About 23,088 deaths were reported
during this period.34

 History of Epidemics in Uttar Pradesh (2004 to 2017)

Table 1.13: History of Epidemics in the State (2004 –2017)35

Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage

Reported number of
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
cases: 7

Malaria Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 85,868 cases

2004
21 Districts in Eastern Uttar 6,611 cases, 1821
JE
Pradesh deaths

Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh Reported number of

34 Source: [Link]
35 Source: National Centre for Disease Control, Disease Surveillance Program
66
Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage
deaths: 4

Number of cases: 121

Malaria Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 1,05,302 cases

Reported number of
deaths: 476
22 Districts in Eastern Uttar
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases:
2,075

Reported number of
deaths: 14
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
2006
Number of cases: 617

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 67

Malaria Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 91,566 cases

Gastro-enteritis Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 612 cases, 6 deaths

Reported number of
deaths: 577
17 Districts in Eastern Uttar
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases:
2,675

Reported number of
deaths: 2
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
2007
Number of cases: 130

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 197

Malaria Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 81,580 cases

Gastro-enteritis Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh 1,264 cases, 15 deaths

Reported number of
deaths: 2
2008 Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases: 51

67
Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage

Acute Respiratory Reported number of

Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 137

Reported number of
deaths: 483
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases:
2,730

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 326

Acute Respiratory Reported number of

Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 180

Reported number of
13 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 50
JE
Pradesh
2009 Number of cases: 362

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 159

21 Districts in Eastern Uttar

Malaria 6,446 cases
Pradesh and Bundelkhand

Reported number of
deaths: 8
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases: 960

Acute Respiratory Reported number of

Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 166

Reported number of
deaths: 494
2010
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,540

Reported number of
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 59
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 325

Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh Reported number of

68
Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage
deaths: 164

Reported number of
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 27
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 224

Reported number of
deaths: 5
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases: 155

2011 Reported number of

Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 26

Acute Respiratory Reported number of

Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 196

Reported number of
deaths: 579
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,492

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 254

Reported number of
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 23
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 139

Reported number of
deaths: 4
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
2012
Number of cases: 342

Acute Respiratory Reported number of

Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 226

Reported number of
deaths: 557
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,484

69
Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage

Reported number of
Diarrhoeal Diseases Across Uttar Pradesh
deaths: 272

Reported number of
21 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 81
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 472

Reported number of
deaths: 5
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
1,614
2013
Acute Respiratory Reported number of
Across Uttar Pradesh
Infection deaths: 377

Reported number of
deaths: 1,236
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
6,425

Reported number of
deaths: 8
H1N1 Western Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases: 98

Reported number of
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 42
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 351

Reported number of
deaths: 9
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
2015 Number of cases:
2,892

Reported number of
deaths: 479
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
2,894

Influenza (H1N1) Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh Reported number of

70
Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage
deaths: 50

Number of cases:
1,578

Reported number of
16 Districts in Eastern Uttar deaths: 73
JE
Pradesh
Number of cases: 410

Reported number of
deaths: 42
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
15,033

Reported number of
deaths: 621
2016
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,919

Reported number of
deaths: 24
Stampede Varanasi
Number injured: 50

Reported number of
deaths: 16
H1N1 Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases: 122

Reported number of
deaths: 28
Dengue Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,032

Reported number of
2017
deaths: 590
AES Across Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
4,693

16 Districts in Eastern Uttar Reported number of

JE
Pradesh deaths: 80

71
 Year Disaster No. of Districts Affected Damage

Number of cases: 675

Reported number of
deaths: 132
H1N1 Various Districts of Uttar Pradesh
Number of cases:
3,858

Reported number of
2020 – till deaths: 23,576
COVID-19 All Districts of Uttar Pradesh
date36 Number of cases:
21,08,686

36 As on 09 August 2022 [Link]/covid-19/

72
 Epidemics Hazard, Risk, Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis
 Districts of Eastern Uttar Pradesh are highly affected by JE, AES,
malaria and other vector-borne and water-borne diseases.
 16 Districts of Eastern Uttar Pradesh (Gorakhpur, Kushinagar,
Maharajganj, Siddharthnagar, Sant Kabir Nagar, Deoria, Azamgarh,
Ghazipur, Bahraich, Ballia, Lakhimpur Kheri, Pilibhit, Balrampur,
Hazard/Location
Gonda, Ayodhya, Mau) are most affected by JE/AES.
 Dengue, malaria and chikungunya frequently affect NCR Districts
and other Districts of Western Uttar Pradesh.
 COVID-19 affects both the urban and rural population of Uttar
Pradesh. The entire State is susceptible to COVID-19.
 Many communicable diseases occurring in Uttar Pradesh are
capable of causing large-scale outbreaks and fall under the epidemic
category.
Vulnerabilities  High population density across the State.
 Economically weaker section of population living in unhygienic
conditions.

Health:
 Probability of increase in neonatal and child morbidity and mortality.
 Probability of poor immunity levels among children, women and the
elderly, especially of the most vulnerable communities.
Nutrition:
 Probability of increase in the number of malnourished and severely
malnourished children.

 Probability of increase in anaemia among adolescent girls and

Risks women.
Education:
 Loss of school days due to closure of schools and absenteeism in
case illness.
 Possibility of children losing interest in studies due to periodic
closure of schools during a pandemic.
 Possibility of low attendance even when schools reopen during a
pandemic.
WASH:
 Possibility of lack of availability of safe drinking water.
 Possibility of poor sanitation conditions in the communities.
 Inadequate level of awareness among communities on prevention
and care in the context of various diseases.
 Inadequate level of awareness among communities on social
protection schemes including health insurance.
Gaps in Existing
 Increased burden on the health system resulting in disruption of
Capacities
some routine health services.
 Inadequate level of awareness among community members on
preventive practices related to health and hygiene.
 Possibility of lack of skilled human resources during an epidemic.

73
 COVID-19
For the first time in recent years, a pandemic has been considered as a disaster. The DM Act
2005 and Epidemic Disease Act 1897 were invoked.
As part of the COVID-19 response, the Relief Commissioner’s Office (RCO) coordinated with
various Government Departments, NGOs and the private sector to promptly manage the COVID-
19 crisis. The RCO focused on managing the large influx of returning migrant workers. Shelters
and transit camps manned by Home Guards in all 75 Districts ensured safe points of arrival and
health check-ups. Many 15-day dry ration kits were given to returning migrants. Community
kitchens across the State worked tirelessly to provide food packets and dry ration kits to the
homeless and to those suffering a loss of livelihood.

The Government also provided direct benefit transfer of INR 1,000 each into the bank accounts
of over 1.2 million daily wage earners and 1 million returning migrants. Incoming trains to
major transit points and bus transfers to the Districts ensured that the migrants reached home
safely. About INR 50,000/- was given to each child who had lost both their parents during
COVID-19. The UPSDMA issued critical advisories and created awareness among communities
on COVID-appropriate behaviour.

There was no prior framework for managing a pandemic of such a scale. The Government of
Uttar Pradesh adopted innovative measures for responding effectively to the pandemic.

As a consequence of Covid-19, the various departments have institutionalised mechanism for

such eventualities in future such as, migration management, availability of oxygen
cylinders/drugs/medicines etc. Hospitals need to gear up for surge in their capabilities, more
essentially the isolation/quarantine wards. The plans for such eventuality require constant
upgradation by the respective departments. SEOC/DEOCs will have to ensure adequate
functional flexibility to adapt the concept of Integrated Covid Command Centre.

5.3.10 Snakebite
The Government of Uttar Pradesh declared snakebite as a State disaster in 2018. Incidents of
snakebite occur throughout the year, however, during monsoons, a sharp rise in cases has been
observed. According to the report from UPSDMA, a total of 1,037 deaths due to snakebite
occurred between 2018 and 2021. The details are as follows.
S. No. Year No. of Deaths
1 2018–2019 21
2 2019–2020 484
3 2020–2021 532
4 2021-2022 981
Total Deaths 2,018
Source: Uttar Pradesh State Disaster Management Authority, 2018–2021

 District-wise Deaths due to Snakebite

Table 1.15: Year-wise Deaths due to Snakebite

S. No. Name of District Number of Deaths

74
 2018–2019 2019–2020 2020–2021 2021-2022
1 Agra 01
2 Firozabad 09 06 15
3 Mainpuri 06 16
4 Mathura 01
5 Aligarh 04 01 05
6 Etah 01 04
7 Hathras 02
8 Kasganj 04
9 Prayagraj 05 01 13
10 Fatehpur 48 50 62
11 Kaushambi 13 10 08
12 Pratapgarh 12 09 18
13 Azamgarh 02 20 32
14 Ballia 01 07 03 20
15 Mau 01 02 03
16 Bareilly 05 02
17 Badaun 02 05 03
18 Pilibhit 25 14 16
19 Shahjahanpur 04 17
20 Basti 01 21
21 Sant Kabir Nagar 01 03
22 Siddharthnagar 02 10
23 Chitrakoot 04 12
24 Banda 02 15 17
25 Hamirpur 01 06 03 18
26 Mahoba 01 12 15 19
27 Bahraich 05 08
28 Balrampur 01 01 06
29 Gonda 05 04 11 28
30 Shravasti 01 02 02
31 Ayodhya 05 08 02 36
32 Barabanki 18 34 59
33 Ambedkar Nagar 29 10 03
34 Sultanpur 01 04 05
35 Amethi 02 20 08
36 Gorakhpur 14 05 09
37 Deoria 04
38 Kushinagar 11 07 06
39 Mahrajganj 01
40 Jhansi 01 06
41 Jalaun 02 02
42 Lalitpur 10 04 41
43 Kanpur Nagar 06
44 Etawah 03 03 14
45 Farrukhabad 11 03 11
46 Kanpur Dehat 33
47 Auraiya 01 04
48 Kannauj 08 04 05

75
S. No. Name of District Number of Deaths

2018–2019 2019–2020 2020–2021 2021-2022

49 Lucknow 06
50 Hardoi 53 25 13
51 Lakhimpur Kheri 14 23 13
52 Raebareli 11 17 23
53 Sitapur 05 06 10 51
54 Unnao 31 48 38
55 Meerut 01
56 Bulandshahr 02 01
57 Gautam Buddh Nagar
58 Ghaziabad
59 Hapur 02
60 Baghpat
61 Mirzapur 07 29 45
62 Sant Ravidas Nagar 01
63 Sonbhadra 29 47 100
64 Moradabad 04 04
65 Amroha 01
66 Bijnor 03 03
67 Sambhal 01
68 Rampur
69 Saharanpur 02 02 02
70 Muzaffarnagar 03
71 Shamli
72 Varanasi 01 01
73 Ghazipur 01 14 14 49
74 Jaunpur 09 19 08
75 Chandauli 02 06
Total Deaths 21 484 532 981
Source: Uttar Pradesh State Disaster Management Authority, 2018–2021

76
From Table 1.15, the hotspots for snakebite can be defined as:
1. Deaths between 51 and 100;
2. Deaths between 21 and 50; and
3. Deaths between 10 and 20.

Figure 13: Snakebite-affected Districts during the period 2018–2021

The Districts with deaths in the topmost category, i.e., 51–100, are Fatehpur (98), Unnao (79),
Hardoi (78), Sonbhadra (76), Barabanki (52).

 Snakebite Hazard, Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

Hazard/Location  Fatehpur, Unnao, Hardoi, Sonbhadra and Barabanki are
hotspots

Vulnerabilities
 Farmland, poultry farms, fishponds, animal sheds, etc.

 Thatched houses, mud houses, farmhouses.

 Abandoned buildings/spaces.

 Forest areas.
Gaps in Existing Capacities  Lack of adequate resources for the worst-affected regions to
improve community education, access to timely health care,
training of medical staff, and provision of appropriate anti-
venom.
 Inadequate availability of skilled human resources at the
first point of care such as PHCs or CHCs. Snakebite is a
medical emergency, requiring prompt and skilled clinical
intervention to save the life of the victims.
 Lack of adequate supply of anti-venom at PHCs/CHCs in
rural areas.
 Unavailability of adequate number of ambulances in remote

77
 rural areas for quick movement of victims to health centres.
 Lack of awareness among community members on seeking
urgent hospital care.
 Lack of trainings on first aid and proper treatment for
snakebite at the community level.
 People resorting to local beliefs and superstitions for
treating snakebite cases.

78
5.4 Social Vulnerability
The State of Uttar Pradesh has people from various socio-economic strata, cultural and
geographical areas. Social vulnerability creates multiple stressors and shocks, including abuse
and social exclusion in various disasters. Social vulnerability refers to the inability of people,
organizations, and societies to withstand adverse impacts from multiple stressors to which
they are exposed. Variables such as household density, population density, literacy rate,
homeless population, elderly population, SC/ST population, workforce participation rate (%),
and the Public Health Infrastructure Index, which defines the influences of vulnerability of the
various variable are given in Table 1.16.
Table 1.16: Social Vulnerability in the State

Index Variables Estimates Influence Sources

PD Population 829 The State of Uttar Pradesh ranks 4th in terms
Density of highest population density among all the
(person/km2) States. The higher the density of the State,
higher will be the vulnerability due to any Census of
disasters. The data on flood in 2019 shows India
7,45,926 people and 1,296 villages were
affected, which resulted in a haphazard 2011
lifestyle recovery of the affected families.

The State of Uttar Pradesh has a low literacy

rate and falls in the bottom five among States
with low literacy.
The literacy gap creates a low level of Census of
involvement/engagement in training and India
capacity building programmes, particularly for
2011
LITR Literacy Rate 69.72 those involved in agriculture. This makes
farmers more inefficient towards the
adaptability of crops to droughts or seasonal
pest attack, which makes them more
vulnerable.

HLP Houseless The State accounts 37.17 per cent of the total Census of
Population houseless population of India. These families India
(person per 329125 do not have roof above their heads, disasters
2011
like flood and drought create vulnerabilities
thousand)
for the household population as the families
do not have proper documentation available
for money transfer from various schemes and
grants in case of any disaster.

EP Elderly 7.7% The State accounts 7.7 per cent of the total MOSPI
Population elderly to the total State population, of which
(%) 80 per cent of the elderly persons stay back in
the rural areas and support their families in
agricultural practices. Flood and droughts
exacerbate the condition of the elderly
livelihood, etc.

79
 Index Variables Estimates Influence Sources
SC/ST SC and ST 21.10% A large section of the population of Uttar Census of
Population and Pradesh accounts for SC population, most of India
(%) 0.57% them living below the poverty line. When a
2011
disaster strikes, the resilience to ‘Build Back
Better’ would be very low in the SC population.
Hence, a large chunk of population is directly
or indirectly vulnerable to disasters.

5.5 Vulnerability Analysis Using SDGs Indicators from 2020 NITI India Index
The NITI Aayog SDG India Index helps in understanding vulnerabilities in a comprehensive
manner. State-level progress and gaps across various sectors are identified to reduce the
vulnerabilities. Aligned to the NITI India Index, the vulnerability analysis for Uttar Pradesh is
given below.

Vulnerability Analysis for the State of Uttar Pradesh

National State
S. No. NITI India Index Analysis
Value Value

1.1 Proportion of population 21.92 29.43 Poverty is a major driver of

living below the national people’s vulnerability towards
poverty line disasters. The State’s poverty
index value is higher than the
national value, which indicates
that a large chunk of the State’s
population lives below the
poverty line and is more likely to
get affected by a disaster. Since
the State is exposed to disasters
throughout the year, a section of
the population is highly
vulnerable which in turn will
increase poverty.
Inclusion of such vulnerable
sections into financial support
and social protection schemes
will help in reducing their
vulnerability.

1.2 Proportion of the population 91.38 93.48 Under-nourishment and low birth
(out of total eligible weight significantly affect the
population) receiving social health of the child. Economic and
protection benefits under social distress created by
Pradhan Mantri Matru disasters aggravates these
Vandana Yojana (PMMVY) conditions further.

80
 Although the State value is higher
than the national value, 100 per
cent coverage of the marginalized
population should be the target to
be achieved as soon as possible;
special provision should be made
for the population living in flood-
and drought-prone areas of the
State.

1.3 Proportion of beneficiaries 99.51 99.23 Damage to roads and bridges,

covered under the National failure of communication and
Food Security Act (NFS) disruption of essential services
2013 are common during and after a
disaster.
Since the coverage in the State is
not 100 per cent in normal times,
after a disaster strikes more
people will be left out of the food
security ambit due to the lack of
access to fair price shops, non-
supply of ration, malpractices of
shopkeepers, etc.
Apart from increasing the
coverage of the vulnerable and
marginal populations under the
NFS, a well-developed disruption-
safe transportation and
distribution system of
food/ration which involves the
vulnerable community will help
in reducing the vulnerability.

1.4 Percentage of children aged 34.7 38.8 Pregnant and breastfeeding

0–4 years who are stunted women, young girls and children
are considered to be more
vulnerable during disaster as
their bodies need nutrients and
are susceptible to harmful
consequences of deficiencies such
1.5 Percentage of pregnant 50.3 51 as anaemia, stillbirth, stunting,
women age 15–49 years who underweight birth, weak
are anaemic immunity, impairment, among
other issues.
Poshan Abhiyaan, Anemia Mukt

81
 1.6 Percentage of children aged 33.4 36.8 Bharat, and PMMVY are schemes
under 0–4 years who are launched by the Central
underweight Government to address the health
issue of women and children.
However, the values at the
national and State levels show
that a large chunk of the targeted
1.7 Percentage of adolescents 28.4 31.6 population is still not covered
aged 10–19 years having under these programmes. These
anaemia (any) numbers are of great concern for
a State like Uttar Pradesh where
the Neonatal Mortality Rate and
Maternal Mortality Rate stand at
35 and 285 per lakh live births
respectively.

1.8 Percentage of fully 91 95 Immunization helps in preventing

immunized children in the morbidity and mortality due to
age group 0–5 years disease among children. Although
the State value is better than the
national value, it still lags in
achieving the target of full
immunization.
Studies have shown that coverage
of vaccination varies significantly
across geographical, regional,
rural-urban, poor-rich, and
gender-related factors. Due to
gender inequality and gender
discrimination, girls receive
fewer immunizations than boys,
and lower vaccination coverage
was also seen among higher birth
order infants.37
So, for a State such as Uttar
Pradesh, which has 40 Districts
that are highly prone to floods,
low immunization rate among
children in these areas will
increase their vulnerability
towards water-borne diseases
and infections.

37
[Link]
82
 1.9 Percentage of families 58.46 38.97 In a developing country such as
covered under Pradhan India, millions are trapped into
Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana poverty due to high out-of-pocket
(PMJAY) expenditure. Low coverage of the
low-income population under
PMJAY makes them more
vulnerable to disasters.

The indicators (described in the table below) act as tools to understand which population
groups and which locations in the State are more likely to face the negative impacts of a disaster
and factors causing it. By addressing these social vulnerability indicators, the risk of damage to
the community can be reduced and resilience can be improved. The actions linked to the above-
mentioned indicators are outlined under prevention, mitigation, preparedness and response
measures in Volume II and III of the SDMP.

 NITI Aayog’s Indicators for Analysing Structural Vulnerability

S. National State
NITI India Index Analysis
No. Value Value

1.1 Percentage of 51.36 20.35 PWS helps in providing sustainable and

population getting adequate water supply which is crucial during
safe and adequate disasters.
drinking water within
Low State and National values of PWS show that
premises through
a large part of the population may face safe
Piped Water Supply
drinking water crisis during a disaster.
(PWS)

1.2 Percentage of urban 87.6 92.1 Improper and unplanned drainage makes the
households having city population vulnerable to public health
drainage facility issues such as malaria, dengue and epidemics
during normal times. During the rainy season, it
increases the overall risk of the population to
these diseases.

1.3 Percentage of 4.2 6.4 Flood and excess rainfall are the major disasters
households living in that occur every year in the State, and many
kutcha houses (rural people lose their houses during those disasters.
+ urban)
With a high percentage of people living in
kutcha houses in the State, the chances of them
falling into poverty is very high. However,
increasing the outreach of Pradhan Mantri Awas
Yojana (PMAY), Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana
(Gramin), Rajeev Awas Yojana, and State-run
housing schemes with disaster-resilient designs
will not only provide sustainable housing, but

83
 S. National State
NITI India Index Analysis
No. Value Value

also help in reducing vulnerability.

The actions linked to the above-mentioned indicators are outlined under prevention, mitigation,
preparedness and response measures in Parts II and III of the SDMP.

5.6 Environment Vulnerability

Environmental hazard has the potential to threaten the surrounding natural environment and
adversely affect people’s health. Due to rapid urbanization, air, water and soil are badly
affected. In urban locations due to rapid growth of the population and urbanization,
environmental degradation is rapid. Air pollution is a growing concern in the State of Uttar
Pradesh. In November 2017, air quality in many cities of the State was reported to be worse
than that of Delhi. The cities Kanpur, Varanasi, Ghaziabad and Muzaffarnagar reported a very
poor Air Quality Index (AQI). Moradabad reported an AQI of 500, which is the highest level on
the scale. Experts have reported finding traces of carbonic elements in the air in Moradabad.
This was attributed to burning of electronic waste and operation of brass factories in the city.
Table 1.17: Environmental Vulnerability in the State

Concentration/
Index Variables Influence Source
Estimates

NO2 Increases the risk of respiratory problems,

NO2 30 in µg/m3
PM2.5 coughing, and serious health problems

PM2.5 88.22 in µg/m3 PM2.5, affects visibility by altering the way

PM10 light is absorbed and scattered in the Central
PM10 194.75 in µg/m3 atmosphere, leading to increased accidents Pollution
Control
High concentrations of SO2 leads to Board
inflammation in the eyes, nose and lungs. The
SO2 SO2 13 in µg/m3 higher concentration may leads to acidic
rainfall and can harm trees and plant by
damaging foliage and decreasing growth

As per the National Forest Policy, the national target for forest cover is 33 per cent. The
Government of Uttar Pradesh is committed to increasing its forest cover to 11 per cent of the
State’s total area by 2030. In recent years, massive plantation programmes have been taken up
in the State to increase the forest and tree cover 38 with the aim of combating climate change.

38
[Link]
84
5.7 Capacity Analysis
Capacity includes physical, institutional, social, or economic means as well as skilled personal or
collective attributes such as leadership and management. The State of Uttar Pradesh has a well-
established institutional network to support DM activities.

5.7.1 Incident Management: State

Emergency Operation Centre (SEOC) Fire Control
Room
The State Emergency Operation Centre aims to
support individuals in crises and link them with
the concerned emergency support department 112 Police 108 Control
Control Room
and Districts in case of a disaster. The SEOC is
supported by the STD-enabled toll-free number, SEOC
1070, where anyone can call in during a crisis and
request assistance on relief/relief queries from
the SEOC. District
SDRF
Disaster
Control
Control
Room
Centre

Figure 24: State Emergency Operations Centre

in Uttar Pradesh

5.7.2 Disaster Response: 112 UP, 102 UP Fire, UP SDRF, UP PAC

The Government of Uttar Pradesh, in accordance with the National Emergency Response System
(NERS), has integrated 112 as its emergency response number with additional services such as
fire, ambulance and women helpline.
The state-of-the-art 112 helpline is integrated with the location-based tracking system,
emergency location service provided by Google Android phones, Radio Over Internet Protocol
(ROIP), Computer-Aided Design (CAD) System, and Primary Rate Interface (PRI) with BSNL for
multiple calls, which are received on Avaya Systems for monitoring of incidents.
 The disaster distress call is transferred to the nearest police response vehicle of 112
Uttar Pradesh to support the individual stuck in a disaster; at the same time, the
response vehicles – 108 ambulances and 102 fire services – are called for support to
the disaster site.
 The number of SDRF has been raised from the State Reserve Police Force to support
disaster response in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

85
 Arrival at Disaster
Scene

Location-based Tracking and Closure and Referral of

Assessment Incident

1070 contact
Point on 112

SIDCC

Disaster Related
Feedback
Distress Call

Figure 15: Functionality of State Integrate Disaster Control Centre in Uttar Pradesh

5.7.3 Information Management and Data Analysis – Remote Sensing Application

Centres
The RCO and UPSDMA are supported by the RSAC in the State to provide information and data
analysis of hazard and vulnerability assessment of various disasters, river course changes and
migration for the Geographic Information System (GIS)-based decision support system. The
State Government has a robust system for reporting disaster-related events.

5.7.4 Early Warning and Dissemination – FMISC, Indian Meteorological Department

(IMD) Lucknow, CWC
Early warning of floods is provided by the Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) rainfall
advisories followed by real time actual rainfall at the various monitoring sites. The reservoirs
and river danger levels are monitored by the Central Water Commission (CWC). The Flood
Management Information System Centre (FMISC) warns the Districts on the flow and discharge
levels from various reservoirs in case of floods.
Early warning of lightning is provided by the Damini app integrated with the National
Informatics Centre’s (NIC’s) mass messaging system, which forecasts the probable lightning-
specific flash points in an area; a mass message is shared on the mobile numbers of the
population as an advisory on lightning.

86
 5.7.5 Equipment Inventory: Fire, DDMA, Tehsil,
The details of the all the resources available in the fire station, DDMA, and tehsil-level
inventories have been updated on the India Disaster Resources Network (IDRN) to strengthen
the mutual sharing of resources during a disaster among the Districts.

87