- In Assam, the primary flood management strategy has been to build embankments and other river control structures which have been inadequate so far.
- As patterns change, physical infrastructure and warning systems needed to reduce flood risks across districts must also evolve.
- District level plans could complement to basin level or trans-state initiatives, allowing Assam to shift beyond physical engineering solutions towards reducing the vulnerabilities of affected populations through local level planning.
- The views in this commentary are those of the author.
More than 2.5 million hectares of cropland affected, over ₹400 billion in damages, and 1,215 lives lost. This is the cost of floods in Assam over a decade, between 2012-2022, and these are simply the quantifiable impacts from available official data.
These numbers indicate a crisis that should be a national priority. Yet, every year, the response to the Assam floods follows a predictable pattern — brief outcry on social media, civil society-led relief efforts, hasty explanations on the causes of the flood, and promises of improved embankment repairs. There is little discussion about the systemic governance gaps that perpetuates this cycle of devastation.
As per the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the risk of damage from floods for a particular region can be seen as a function of three factors. First is the hazard or the potential for occurrence of a flood determined by climatic factors like rainfall intensity and physical factors such as drainage density. Second is exposure or the number of people and assets that lie directly in the path of the flood. Finally, there is vulnerability which represents how badly a region’s population is likely to be impacted when a flood does occur. This depends on socio-economic conditions that determine how easily people are harmed (sensitivity) and how well they can recover (adaptive capacity).
In Assam, the primary flood management strategy has been to build embankments and other river control structures. The state has built around 423 embankments covering more than 4,800 kilometres. The focus, therefore, has been on creating physical barriers to reduce the flood hazard.
The planning for these flood responses is primarily done by the Brahmaputra Board, whose Master Plans for the Brahmaputra and Barak basins serve as important planning documents guiding embankment construction and erosion control measures. The implementation of these projects is done by the Brahmaputra Board itself in conjunction with state bodies such as the Water Resources Department. This is also complemented by flood management projects financed through loans from multilateral banks.
The question, then, is why has this approach been inadequate in reducing flood risks across the state? Answering it requires understanding a few key aspects of Assam’s floods.
Assam’s history of floods
Assam has a long history of floods. Typically, heavy rainfall in the catchment areas of the Brahmaputra, and to a lesser extent the Barak, causes these rivers to overflow, a risk compounded by high sedimentation levels that have progressively raised the riverbed. As a result, about 40% of the state’s land area is vulnerable to floods. The current planning for flood management is largely based on these patterns.
However, flood patterns are shifting due to climate change induced erratic rainfall patterns. This year’s floods, for instance, occurred due to overflowing of the south bank tributaries of the Brahmaputra and not from the main river itself. Heavy rainfall in the catchments of these tributaries, mainly in the hills of Nagaland, was the trigger.
As patterns change, physical infrastructure and warning systems needed to reduce flood risks across districts must also evolve. This leads to a constant cat and mouse dynamic, made worse by the fact that building embankments requires both heavy capital and time investment. Even now, an estimated 60% of Assam’s existing embankments need repair. Rather than fighting the river many experts have proposed a shift towards learning to live with the river. This would involve understanding flooding challenges at a more local level and implementing nature-based solutions such as reviving wetlands and reforestation to improve drainage of the floodwater.
While flood hazards are shifting due to climate change, vulnerabilities also differ greatly across districts. A 2026 study by researchers from the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, estimated district-wise flood damage and found that districts with high poverty, poor connectivity, limited healthcare access and a prevalence of kutcha housing are more vulnerable to flood damage. Thus, flooding of similar magnitude can have vastly different impacts across districts.
The priority, then, must also be to reduce district-level vulnerabilities by accounting for each district’s unique circumstances. This will require a shift towards more non-structural interventions: stronger social protection, updated building guidelines, tailored early warning systems, among others.
District level adaptation plans a possible solution
Thus, reducing flood risks in Assam will require complementing existing built engineering solutions with more nature-based approaches while also dedicating additional resources to reducing vulnerabilities of local communities. This can best be achieved by adopting a more localised planning approach. For instance, hydrological analysis might reveal natural drainage paths for floodwaters, but local communities often hold historical knowledge of where waterbodies once stood. Combining science with local realities will be key to effective flood management.
Existing planning instruments are currently inadequate for local level planning. At present, the only localised planning instruments are the district level disaster management plans (DDMPs). However, these plans focus on immediate response mechanisms to floods and not systematic adaptation interventions. District-level adaptation plans or slightly more ambitious basin level adaptation plans could bridge this gap.
District-level plans aren’t a novel idea. Several countries already develop them alongside their national adaptation plans. These plans look beyond flooding alone and help a district map its own climate vulnerabilities and set adaptation priorities suited to local conditions.
The first stage of these plans involves mapping localised climate risks, both short- and long-term. This requires projecting how different warming scenarios will affect temperature, rainfall, and other variables at the district level. The next step is to combine this data with local physiography to see how climate hazards like floods are likely to evolve in a district over time. Layering in socio-economic data then allows for sector-specific vulnerability assessments, showing how key sectors such as infrastructure, agriculture, and health are likely to be affected in the years ahead. This eventually allows planners to base their decisions on district specific future expectations rather than past data.
Once vulnerabilities are known, the next step is setting adaptation priorities for each sector, through extensive consultation with local stakeholders. The priorities can draw on solutions already proposed in basin-level master plans, as well as more localised measures rooted in traditional practice. This marks a key departure from centralised planning: priorities are built from the ground up, incorporating local lived experience and generating buy-in, without ignoring basin level realities and solutions.
The final step is to identify concrete projects for each priority, the financing mechanisms to fund them, and the agencies responsible for implementing them.
Some concrete benefits
Timely flood information is the first line of defence. Yet this year’s flood shows that the current early warning systems (EWS) can often be inadequate. The issue is twofold. First the current EWS are designed to monitor river water levels that rise gradually over several hours or days and the flash flood guidance systems lack granularity to detect extremely localised extreme rainfall events. This year for instance, the cause of flooding was not a cloudburst but a sustained bout of heavy rainfall in Mon district of Nagaland which lasted for around eight or nine hours, but locals downstream were still not alerted in time. Second, because the current system is centralised, district level officials are the last to get the required data.
District plans can help reverse this process by mapping localised flood threats and devising community level early warning systems which would give the impetus to local officials to monitor critical variables and communicate messages clearly and on time to residents of the district. As rainfall patterns grow more erratic, such localised systems may be key to saving lives.
Another issue is that housing in most districts is poorly adapted to flooding. At a press meet after this year’s floods, Assam’s Chief Minister noted that in some regions, 100 percent of houses had been damaged, and proposed a model housing scheme. But what counts as a model house will differ by district. For instance, stilt houses or chang ghars have received attention as a traditional flood protection practice. For some districts where these practices have been prevalent a model housing guideline may take design elements from traditional stilt houses. Yet Assam also sits in India’s highest seismic risk zone, with some districts on active fault lines or seismically vulnerable soil, which will also have to be taken into consideration.
Apart from the design aspects, the district level plans can identify what is needed from a policy perspective to enable a shift towards resilient housing. This could include identifying priority projects which can be implemented or how support from existing schemes such as the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana can be better directed to support resilient housing.
Another persistent challenge for flood management is finance. Increasingly, state and central funds are being completed by loans from multilateral banks (MDBs) such as the ADB and World Bank. However, the flood management projects funded by these entities are carrying forward the existing focus on deploying embankments and engineered soil erosion measures partly because these institutions aren’t always best placed to understand local realities and fund vulnerability-reduction efforts. The district level plans could be an important resource to direct some of these funds towards building adaptive capacity. The projects and priorities outlined in district plans could essentially serve as a new project pipeline for MDBs.
Effective planning is the first step to effective flood adaptation. District level plans could be a good complement to basin level or trans-state initiatives, allowing Assam to shift beyond physical engineering solutions towards reducing the vulnerabilities of affected populations through local level planning.
Banner image: A man wades through floodwaters after days of torrential rains in Kampur, Assam in June 2025. (AP Photo)
The author is an adaptation specialist at the UNFCCC Regional Collaboration Centre (RCC) for MENA and South Asia.
Credits
