The catastrophe in Nepal demonstrated how rapidly a glacier collapse can turn into a deadly flow. For mountainous Tajikistan, this is not a distant scenario, but a real risk that requires preparedness today.

A massive glacier and rockfall in Nepal triggered a rapid descent of an enormous mass of ice, water, stones, and mud through narrow mountain valleys. As a result, within minutes, populated areas, houses, roads, bridges, power lines, and other infrastructure were destroyed.

More than two thousand people have either died or are listed as missing.

Special attention must be paid to the speed of development of this catastrophe. According to preliminary estimates, a significant portion of the glacier and rocks collapsed from a height of more than 5,000 meters. The mass of ice and stones fell approximately 1,200 meters and formed a powerful flow that rushed down the valley.

There was practically no time for warning and evacuating the population.

For Tajikistan, with its similar landscape, what happened testifies to a real risk. More than 90% of the country’s territory is occupied by mountains. Many populated areas, roads, bridges, power lines, and other critical infrastructure are located in narrow valleys along rivers and directly beneath steep mountain slopes. Particularly high vulnerability is characteristic of GBAO, the Rasht and Zeravshan valleys, as well as other mountainous regions of the RRP.

Glaciers are shrinking, risks are growing

The scale of glacier reduction is already significant. According to UN data, glaciers in the Tian Shan and Pamir regions have lost up to 30% of their volume over the past 60 years.

As of October 2025, more than 1,400 glacial lakes had been registered in Tajikistan, of which 479 have an area exceeding 10,000 square meters.

Typically, glacier reduction is viewed primarily as a long-term threat to water resources. However, for Tajikistan there is a more immediate risk. Accelerated melting of snow and glaciers, formation and expansion of glacial lakes, intensive precipitation, and instability of mountain slopes increase the probability of such rapid catastrophes—floods, mudflows, landslides, and other dangerous natural processes.

Recent mudflows in the Aini district, fortunately still significantly smaller in scale, demonstrate potential scenarios for the development of such events.

Mountain territories are particularly vulnerable. In GBAO, for example, populated areas and main transportation infrastructure are located primarily in narrow valleys along the Panj River and its tributaries. Mudflows, landslides, rockfalls, and floods already regularly damage roads and other infrastructure. Their scale is currently significantly smaller than what occurred in Nepal, but the main risk factors are present in Tajikistan as well.

Economic consequences are also significant. The World Bank estimates Tajikistan’s long-term losses from natural disasters during the period 1992–2016 at more than $1.8 billion. Damage and economic losses from natural disasters affecting the country’s main road network alone are estimated at approximately 0.5% of GDP annually.

During an inspection of more than 2,000 kilometers of main transportation corridors, the World Bank identified 331 dangerous sections. Physical protection of these sections would require approximately $404 million.

“

High seismic activity further increases vulnerability. Earthquakes can trigger landslides, rockfalls, and collapses on unstable mountain slopes. Therefore, glacial, hydrological, geological, and seismic risks must be assessed comprehensively.

From glacier monitoring to protecting mountain communities

In recent years, Tajikistan has made a significant contribution to the international agenda for glacier conservation. On the country’s initiative, the UN General Assembly declared 2025 the International Year for the Conservation of Glaciers, and March 21 as World Glacier Day. In May 2025, an International High-Level Conference on Glacier Conservation was held in Dushanbe.

As a result, Tajikistan has already achieved significant results in advancing the international glacier conservation agenda.

Now it is necessary to strengthen the practical component of this work.

Tajikistan already has considerable experience in such work. Programs of the Aga Khan Foundation previously conducted risk assessments in hundreds of mountain communities, identified evacuation routes and safe zones, studied glacial lakes, and created local response groups. Hundreds of small projects were implemented, including riverbank reinforcement, construction of mudflow protection structures and bridges, as well as other protective measures.

The World Bank, within the framework of disaster risk reduction projects, together with the Committee for Emergency Situations and local authorities, also supports riverbank reinforcement, restoration of more resilient roads and bridges, development of regional emergency management centers, early warning systems, emergency communications, and search and rescue capacity.

The World Bank itself emphasizes the need for further investments in early warning systems and the ability to respond quickly to natural disasters.

This experience must be urgently extended to the most vulnerable mountain regions of the country.

What specifically needs to be done?

For Tajikistan, the priority should be to increase the preparedness of the most vulnerable mountain communities. The experience of the World Bank, AKDN/MSDSP, and other partners shows that a comprehensive approach is most effective, combining early warning systems and population and local service training with investments in protective and resilient infrastructure.

First direction—development of accessible and reliable early warning systems. In the most vulnerable populated areas, systems are needed that can timely warn of mudflows, floods, landslides, and avalanches.

Satellite monitoring should be supplemented by data from Tajikhydromet on temperature, precipitation, snow and glacier melting, river conditions, and other local observations. The main requirement is rapid delivery of warnings directly to the population and local services through mobile communications, radio, sirens, and other available means.

Second direction—increasing the preparedness of the mountain communities themselves. In populated areas with high risk levels, safe zones and evacuation routes must be identified, local volunteer and rescue groups must be trained, and regular practical drills must be conducted.

In remote areas, basic emergency supplies, equipment, and communications must be pre-positioned in advance, since destruction of a road or bridge can isolate a populated area for an extended period.

Third direction—increasing the resilience of local infrastructure. Roads, bridges, riverbank reinforcement, and mudflow protection structures should be built and restored taking into account increasing climate and natural risks. The World Bank’s experience in Tajikistan demonstrates the need to apply the Build Back Better principle: after a natural disaster, damaged infrastructure should be restored to higher resilience standards, rather than returning to the previous level of vulnerability.

“

Particularly important are relatively small local investments: reinforcement of a dangerous riverbank section, bridge protection, clearing and reinforcement of a mudflow channel, drainage improvement, or protection of a road section. Such measures can significantly reduce risks for an entire populated area and are often more cost-effective than subsequent recovery from a major emergency.

Fourth direction—more effective territorial planning and risk management. Construction of new housing, schools, medical facilities, roads, and other infrastructure should be carried out taking into account current maps of mudflow, flood, landslide, and seismic risks.

At the same time, construction of expensive protective structures is not necessary everywhere. In sparsely populated areas, temporary closure of dangerous road sections, creation of alternative routes, designation of safe zones, restriction of new construction, and other organizational measures may be more effective.

Finally, fifth—it is necessary to ensure sustainable financing of these measures directly at the level of districts, jamoats, and the most vulnerable populated areas.

International climate finance and funds from glacier conservation programs should be directed to a greater extent toward practical adaptation: early warning, monitoring, strengthening of local infrastructure, population training, and enhancement of local emergency response system capacity.