·PIB·15 marks·250–350 words

Evaluate the role of inter-agency coordination and technology in strengthening India's maritime disaster response.

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. Inter-agency coordination: strengths
  2. Technology: strengths
  3. Limitations

India is responsible for maritime search and rescue (SAR) across about 4.6 million sq km, an area far larger than its EEZ [2]. The Coast Guard Act, 1978 makes the "safety of life and property at sea" a statutory duty of the Coast Guard (ICG) [3]. SAREX-2026, held off Paradip, showed that coordination and technology multiply what the ICG can do. It also showed they cannot fully make up for gaps in capacity.

Inter-agency coordination: strengths

  • National Maritime SAR Board (NMSARB): it has 31 members, including ministries, the Armed Forces and all coastal States/UTs. It meets every year to review the National Maritime SAR Plan [2].
  • Multi-agency drill: SAREX-2026 brought together the ICG, Navy, IAF, DG Shipping, the Shipping Corporation of India, Fisheries, Customs, Marine Police, Paradip Port and the Odisha administration. It practised an aircraft ditching and a ship fire happening together, under an Incident Command Post [1].
  • Diplomatic value: 32 observers from 30 countries attended, which presents India as a dependable SAR partner under SAGAR/MAHASAGAR [1].

Technology: strengths

  • Air and sea assets: IAF C-130J and Mi-17 aircraft worked with ICG Dorniers and helicopters. Air-droppable life rafts and ROVs were demonstrated [1].
  • Distress alerts: more than 20,000 ISRO Distress Alert Transmitters have been used on fishing boats since 2010. The second-generation DAT-SG confirms to the crew that their alert was received and can send them weather warnings [5].

Limitations

  • Planned, daytime drills: the date and scenario were fixed in advance. The CAG found the ICG fell short of its night-flying targets [4].
  • Too few ships and aircraft: the ICG assessed that it needed 175 ships and 221 aircraft but had 68 and 45 (2008) [4]. Several stations had no jetty or refuelling facility [4].
  • Funding gap: in 2022-23 the ICG received ₹7,310 crore against the ₹10,804 crore it asked for [6].
  • Alert coverage: the official ISRO page does not say what share of fishing boats carry DAT-SG [5].

Evaluation: coordination and technology have greatly improved response design, but fleet size and readiness still limit what happens in a real emergency.

Overall, NMSARB-led coordination and indigenous technology are the base of India's maritime disaster response. The next step is to hold unannounced and night drills, publish after-action reports, prioritise aircraft and shore support, and have States fit DAT-SG across their fishing fleets. These steps would turn exercise readiness into real-world readiness and back India's MAHASAGAR commitment.

Sources

  1. 1PIB: Indian Coast Guard conducts 12th National Maritime Search & Rescue Exercise (SAREX-2026) off Paradip coast in Odishaagencies, assets, scenario, Incident Command Post, 32 observers from 30 countries, SAGAR/MAHASAGAR link
  2. 2ICG: 23rd National Maritime Search and Rescue Board Meeting, Gandhinagar (10 Nov 2025)31-member NMSARB, annual meetings, ~4.6 million sq km search and rescue region
  3. 3India Code: Coast Guard Act, 1978"safety of life and property at sea" mandate
  4. 4CAG Performance Audit Report No. 7 of 2011: Role and Functioning of the Indian Coast Guardnight-flying shortfall, 175/221 needed against 68/45 held, stations without jetty or fuel
  5. 5ISRO: Distress Alert Terminal – Second Generation (DAT-SG)more than 20,000 DATs since 2010, two-way acknowledgement and warnings
  6. 6Standing Committee on Defence (17th Lok Sabha), 40th ReportICG 2022-23 budget asked vs allocated

More from this note