5. Knowledge and Perception of Risk

So, we can have many more such small things right, we have many more such like insurance, like rainwater harvesting, we have many more such small technologies. Now, we need to promote, we need to encourage people to adopt and install these small technologies, a small thing but a big challenge. So, what do we do for the local government? let us say, municipal authority, they ask people to follow something like you have to evacuate during certain time or you have to manage your solid waste, you have to follow building bye-laws, you have to store food during emergency, or you have to keep survival kit, or contingency kit like that. Now, this process that a local government is telling something to the people at risk to reduce their risk and to install and adopt some disaster preparedness technology. We know this is called a simple risk communication process, right but it is not always easy.

In this chunk, we are introduced to various small technologies and practices that can help manage risks, such as insurance and rainwater harvesting. It emphasizes the importance of promoting these technologies and communicating effectively from local government to the community. The main idea is that while the government can issue guidelines, like evacuation orders, effective communication alone is not sufficient to ensure the public's compliance or preparedness.

Consider a local community where the government sets a mandatory evacuation during a storm warning. Despite the orders and warnings communicated through newspapers and radio, many residents may choose to stay, believing they can weather the storm due to past experiences or personal judgments. This situation highlights how simply telling people what they should do does not guarantee they will act accordingly.

We know this is called a simple risk communication process, right but it is not always easy, the conventional risk preparedness mechanism or system, they think that only providing information to the people is enough, if I ask people to evacuate during emergency that is enough but that is not always enough. People from the field, from various research across the globe is showing that after putting a lot of money, running a lot of projects, spending a lot of time, the inclination; the tendency of the people to prepare against disaster is elusive, it is really low.

This chunk points out that risk communication is often seen as straightforward, where informing the public is viewed as sufficient. However, research shows that people's willingness to prepare for disasters is often very low, even after substantial investments in education and preparedness programs. It suggests that knowing about risks isn't enough to change behavior without addressing deeper issues in perception and readiness.

Think of a fire drill conducted at a school. Teachers may inform students of the procedure, but it's not uncommon for some students to ignore it or not take it seriously. This reflects the challenge in risk perception; despite being informed about the fire drill, students may feel that a real fire is unlikely, leading them to underestimate the necessity of preparedness.

Why; why people are not preparing? Here is a good example; what do you think as risky, people may not think is risky. Like this one, I told maybe many times that this other person on the other side of the boat is considered that he is not at risk because this boat is sinking but he is in other side, he is not going to die. Or maybe another person whom this lady is asking that why 40% of your umbrella is covered, he said I received an emergency message is saying that there is a chance of 40% rain. So, he interpreted the message of early warning this way, so that way people interpret, way people perceive them is varies.

In this chunk, we explore the reasons behind people's inaction in the face of risks. It presents examples where individuals either fail to recognize their risk or misinterpret information. One person may think they're safe in a sinking boat, highlighting denial; another interprets a weather warning about rain in a way that makes them feel secure. This variability in perception impacts overall preparedness and response.

Imagine someone driving on an icy road. They might feel confident and think they can navigate the conditions without slipping. However, their perception of safety can be dangerously misleading, especially when weather warnings about ice are announced. Their confidence can lead to underestimation of actual risk, resulting in potential accidents.

Not only that people have a different orientations about preparedness. People think okay, I know about disaster, I know my area very well so, when the flood will come, tsunami will come, I can easily escape, do not underestimate me. Actually, people overestimate their knowledge that they know all, or people estimate that they are prepared enough that even flood will can earthquake will happen I will be safe because I am not that vulnerable, I am prepared enough, my house is good, my house is three storied, no flood can affect me.

This chunk discusses how many people overestimate their level of preparedness and knowledge regarding potential disasters. They may believe that their familiarity with local geography and emergency procedures is enough to keep them safe, which can lead to complacency. Unfortunately, this overconfidence can be dangerous because it may prevent people from taking necessary precautions.

Consider a homeowner who believes their two-story home is safe from flooding. They might feel secure about their home’s foundation and ignore advice about flood precautions. However, if a severe flood occurs, this overconfidence in their preparedness could leave them unprepared for the actual situation, demonstrating the risks associated with underestimating real threats.

Or maybe people think that okay, it is also the responsibility of others like, people often blame the municipal authority for getting flood, they said that flood is an the issue of the local government, it is not my duty to protect myself against flood risk. It is the duty or responsibility of the local government to protect me.

This chunk raises the issue of how individuals often shift responsibility for preparation and safety onto local authorities. Many people believe that it is the government’s role to protect them from floods and other disasters, which diminishes their personal accountability and initiative to take preventive actions.

Think of a community living in a flood-prone area that relies exclusively on the government to manage flood defenses. When a flood hits, residents may feel frustrated that the government did not act adequately, failing to acknowledge their own role in taking preventive measures, such as securing their properties. This reliance on authorities can hinder community resilience.

Here are some data we can see that, actually, ideally we should have more money should be invested on prevention and preparedness. But if you look into the current situation, it is totally opposite, we are spending more money in emergency response and very less money in prevention and preparedness, right. So, we need something to do and we are not doing it.

This chunk emphasizes the financial imbalance in disaster management, where significantly more resources are allocated to responding to emergencies rather than investing in preparedness and prevention measures. This misallocation can lead to an increased vulnerability of communities to disasters, as they are not adequately prepared before emergencies occur.

Consider a family that has a budget but spends the majority of it on emergency medical treatments instead of maintaining a healthy lifestyle. If they focused on preventive healthcare, they would likely experience fewer health emergencies and ultimately lower costs over time. Similarly, investing in disaster preparedness can reduce the costs associated with responding to disasters.

So, disaster preparedness which we are promoting it is not enough, people are more, we are spending more money on disaster relief, people are not ready to spend money on preparedness so, government is also failing to spend money on preparedness, people are not motivated to do it.

This final chunk underscores the gap between being aware of and actually preparing for disasters. While efforts are made to promote disaster preparedness, the reality is that both individuals and governments often prioritize spending on immediate disaster relief instead of proactive measures. This lack of motivation to invest in preparedness leads to poorer outcomes when disasters occur.

Imagine a student who is aware of the importance of studying for exams but spends their time playing video games instead. When the exam date arrives, they find themselves unprepared and anxious. In the same way, knowing about disaster preparedness is not sufficient without taking action to actually prepare.

--