KADUNA’S PROACTIVE MEASURES AGAINST FLOODS

The state has mapped out communities vulnerable to flooding, while temporary shelters are in place, writes PAUL TUNKU

In many parts of the country, governments are often very good at responding to emergencies after they have occurred. Officials arrive with relief materials, committees are inaugurated, victims are visited, promises are made and, sometimes, photographs are taken. By then, however, homes may already have been washed away, livelihoods destroyed and, tragically, lives lost.

That is why the latest proactive flood measures in Kaduna State deserve attention. In fact, it is refreshing that it is anticipating the problem and preparing to tackle it. The Kaduna State Emergency Management Agency (KADSEMA) says it has mapped communities considered vulnerable to flooding, identified temporary shelters and pre-positioned relief and non-food materials across the state. The agency has also strengthened its early-warning system, drawing on forecasts from the Nigerian Meteorological Agency and the Nigeria Hydrological Services Agency.

According to the Public Relations Officer of KADSEMA, Philips Dominic, communities such as Rafin Guza, Bashama, Unguwan Rimi, Barnawa, Kabala Costain and Romi have been identified as particularly vulnerable because of their proximity to rivers and tributaries. Parts of Tudun Wada, Barnawa, Rigasa and Sabon Tasha have also been mapped because of their low-lying terrain and drainage problems. But it is important to note that is not just a map-and-report exercise. The government says temporary shelters have been identified, including the Namadi Sambo Skills Acquisition Centre in Tudun Wada and Romi Primary and Secondary School. Emergency tents have also been provided for deployment when necessary, while relief materials have been positioned at zonal and local government levels.

It is also encouraging that the government is not waiting for floodwaters to rise before evacuating people. KADSEMA cited the evacuation of residents of Askolaye following warnings of flooding. While residents initially resisted leaving, community engagement eventually resulted in their evacuation. That is what disaster preparedness should be.

In all of these, it is noteworthy that there is a structured relief plan. “All resources are strategically positioned at zonal and LGA levels under the custody of the LEMCs across the 23 LGAs,” the KADSEMA spokesman said. “Deployment of these resources will be triggered immediately upon activation of the designated safe havens. The activation and deployment protocol can be executed within minutes as the situation warrants. All necessary arrangements are in place, and the state remains on high alert.”

This brings up some hard and difficult conversation. While temporary shelters are good and necessary, they are not a substitute for flood prevention in the first place. A government cannot indefinitely evacuate people from the same communities every rainy season. It must address the rivers, drainage channels, erosion corridors, waterways and settlements that make those communities vulnerable. To his credit, Governor Sani appears to understand this.

In 2024, his administration directed relevant ministries and agencies to develop a flood-mitigation plan for areas identified as flood-prone. The state subsequently embarked on drainage desilting across Kaduna, Zaria and Kafanchan. Officials said the plan targeted about 160 kilometres of drainage. The administration also made flood prevention part of a broader environmental agenda.

In 2024, about 1.7 million trees were planted. And in January 2025, the Sani-led administration announced plans to plant 10 million trees over four years as part of its afforestation programme. The government also said it had mandated the desilting of about 140 kilometres of drainage and was considering the dredging of River Kaduna and other water bodies. Then, in July 2026, Sani flagged off a comprehensive flood and gully erosion control project stretching from Rigasa to Tudun Wada. The state government says the project will cost more than N34 billion and cover 17.8 kilometres. It is aimed at tackling a flooding and erosion problem that has plagued the area for decades.

There is an important human dimension to that project. About N2 billion in compensation was reportedly paid to approximately 1,000 people whose houses would be affected by the intervention. The governor said the policy was deliberate: government should not destroy people’s property in the name of development without paying adequate compensation. As it is, flood-control projects can be traumatic when residents are treated as obstacles. A drainage channel may protect thousands of people, but the family whose house is demolished to create it still deserves justice. In that sense, compensation is not charity but part of responsible public policy.

In addition, there is also a broader lesson here. Flood management cannot be reduced to the task for either the Ministry of Environment or an emergency agency. It is no longer a rainfall problem but a governance problem. Now, Governor Sani has an opportunity here to go beyond building projects and make Kaduna a model for transparent climate and disaster governance. The state could publish, in accessible form, the flood-prone communities identified, the projects being undertaken in each, the amount budgeted, the amount released, the source of funding, the contractors handling them, the stage of completion and the expected impact. That would transform flood management from something citizens hear about from government officials into something they can actually monitor.

Also, aside from what the state government is expected to do, citizens themselves have responsibilities. Government can clear drains, but citizens can block them again with refuse. Government can issue evacuation warnings, but residents can ignore them. Government can construct flood-control infrastructure, but people can continue building on waterways. In 2024, following flooding in parts of Zaria and Sabon-Gari, the state government said more than 200 houses were destroyed and blamed some of the vulnerability on inadequate drainage, refuse dumping and structures erected within waterways. The government also said some residents had refused to evacuate despite warnings.

Anyway, the real test of Sani’s flood policy, therefore, is not whether KADSEMA can produce tents when the water arrives. It is whether, over time, fewer Kaduna residents need those tents. A successful flood policy should eventually produce fewer evacuations, fewer destroyed houses, fewer collapsed roads, fewer washed-away farms and fewer emergency interventions. In 2025, Kaduna established safe centres in seven locations, equipped with tents, food, non-food items and other supplies. In the same year, the state opened safety camps in 13 high-risk local government areas in anticipation of flooding. Now, in 2026, Kaduna is mapping vulnerable communities even more precisely and positioning resources closer to them. That progression is encouraging.

However, Kaduna should aim to become a state where flood prediction is connected to flood prevention and early warning triggers community action and safety protocols. It should be such that drainages are maintained before the rains rather than cleared after disaster. And a place where waterways are protected from encroachment. The Sani-led administration should not regard emergency preparedness as an achievement in itself. It is only one layer of the solution.

The real victory will come when heavy downpours no longer automatically translate into a humanitarian emergency. For now, Kaduna appears to be doing something many Nigerian governments struggle to do. That is, preparing for tomorrow’s disaster while attempting to address yesterday’s environmental problems. That deserves recognition.

Tunku writes from Kaduna