Rebuilding Nepal without repeating the mistakes of 2015

[...]

The disaster therefore presents Nepal with more than an immediate humanitarian emergency. It exposes how economic vulnerabilities can extend across political borders when livelihoods, trade routes and infrastructure depend upon a shared Himalayan geography. For Kathmandu, Beijing and New Delhi, the question is not simply how to respond to this disaster, but how to reduce the economic and human consequences of the next one.

[...]

The National Planning Commission's forthcoming. Post-Disaster Needs Assessment provides an opportunity to apply that lesson. Rather than merely tallying damaged roads, bridges, power facilities and other assets, the assessment should incorporate climate and geological risk into decisions about reconstruction. But planning must be accompanied by institutional reform. 

[...]

But these needs must look to the future, too. Systemic vulnerabilities, such as the absence of automated early-warning networks along dangerous rivers and the unregulated development of infrastructure in vulnerable flood zones, continue to hinder the country’s ability to manage crises. Because the avalanche that triggered the flooding originated in unmonitored Tibetan territory, it exposed a critical gap in transboundary monitoring and data sharing, making reliance on post-disaster diplomatic communication insufficient.

[...]

Nepal's challenge, then, is to change what reconstruction means. The experience after the 2015 earthquake demonstrated the costs of institutional fragmentation and the importance of rebuilding with future risks in mind. The present disaster adds another lesson: some of Nepal's most consequential environmental risks cannot be fully monitored or managed within its borders.