4. Impacts of the 2005 Flood
4.1 Review of data availability
The detailed figures of the impacts of the 2005 flood are presented by country in an annex to this report. It is impossible to produce a detailed and comprehensive assessment of the impacts of the 2005 flood at LMB level. The process of monitoring the flood and the data collected vary from one country to another. Discrepancies are also often observed between data gathered at national level and data collected at provincial or district levels. Different technical departments may have also their own approach regarding the impacts of the flood (often depending on their specific mandate). Some indicators are not understood similarly throughout the region. All flood events are not necessarily recorded, and a "no data" is not necessarily clearly distinguished from a "zero value". For that reason, more information can be obtained by referring to the sections related to the flood analysis in each country to get a more precise idea of the impacts.
One major component of the damage is nevertheless recorded in each country: the loss of paddy fields. It is generally monitored in nearly every district/province both by villagers and the departments of agriculture. The indicator "loss of paddy fields" gives a good idea of the intensity of the flood and its duration. Although the limit between flooded paddy field (with yield reduction) and total loss of fields is not clear, it is a good indicator for drawing flood maps. It would have been even better if, at the same time, records could have been made of planted areas giving the percentage of losses. But planted areas are not surveyed everywhere in the LMB which means this consolidation is not possible. Damage to livestock may be a good indicator of the suddenness of a flood. Generally, people are well prepared for evacuating livestock from flood risk areas in time. This is not necessarily the case when flash floods occur or when water from the Mekong rises exceptionally fast.
Reports of "damage to infrastructure" (irrigation systems, roads, bridges, school, temples, health centres) are often patchy and damage is generally estimated only when external funds are requested for reconstruction. In many cases, repairs are part of the maintenance budget and no specific assessment is recorded at the Disaster Management Centres, although some data should exist with some individuals or technical departments. The ability to assess "damage to infrastructure" was also reported as a concern due to lack of training.
Damage to houses and costs of resettlement are also not systematically recorded except when authorities have strong plans to address the issue, such as in the Mekong Delta in Viet Nam. The number of people who died from the flood is obviously an indicator of the flood intensity, but many reasons for such deaths may occur: children may be bathing in the water; people fall from houses into water or houses are washed away by landslides. Health issues are generally poorly reported due to the difficulty of estimating a direct link with the flood.
Choose a newsletter: