Lessons Learned from the 2008 Kosi River Flood

About this Article
Contributed by:Amanda Repella, Shafiqul Islam

Contributor Perspective(s): Academic
Article last edited 28 Jun 2013 by Amanda
Article originally added by Amanda

What is an ASI Article? Individuals may add their own Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight (ASI) to a case by linking a case to an ASI article. These ASI articles are protected, so that each person who creates a section retains control of their own content. Please use the discussion page for commenting on this article. Learn More

This article is linked to 2008 Kosi Flood

1. Significant flooding along the Kosi flood control project has occurred multiple times since the 1960s. While a few of these breaches (1968, notably) can be linked to precipitation and excessive flow rates, most have occurred due to siltation and a lack of regular maintenance.
2. The shifting path of the Kosi and powerful scouring and sedimentation patterns along the river have proved to be a greater challenge than originally envisioned by the engineers who developed the project. The flood control structures have altered the flood regime, but without constant monitoring and maintenance, they are likely to fail again. While the project altered the original flood risks in the region, it has had unintended outcomes that include high maintenance costs and increased risk of catastrophic flood due to structural failures.
3. Existing arrangements for monitoring and maintaining the embankments were not sufficient to prevent the 2008 flood. A combination of institutional mechanisms, community engagement, and technical solutions would be needed to prevent similar catastrophes.
4. The technical challenges of maintaining the embankments under changing channel conditions and rising river levels requires coordination between India and Nepal to manage the river with new structures and maintenance activities, such as digging additional channels or dredging. The original agreement did not include any mechanism for dealing with these unforeseen problems.
5. Planning for prevention and mitigation of disasters in a transboundary basin requires both transboundary and local efforts, as the effects of a flood will cross borders and affect local populations from both sides of the boundaries. The breach site for the 2008 flood was in Nepal, and most of the flood impacts there occurred in the Sunsari districts, with about 60,000 people affected. However, a few kilometers downstream, in India, about 3.3 million people were affected in Bihar (Supaul, Saharsa, Madhepura, Araria and Purnia districts).
6. Emergency management planning and EWS are viewed as key steps in preventing a hazard from becoming a disaster. One of the pressing issues after the flood was that there were few emergency management plans or protocols in place for Nepal in case of flooding or other disasters. In Nepal, a National Strategy for Disaster Risk Management has been initiated to begin the process of building an EWS and disaster response protocols and capacity.

Author note: This is an evolving case perspective and I hope to expand it over time -- ACR