4.2. Public Reception to Risk Messages

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.

Local governments often issue warnings and advice to their communities concerning disaster preparedness. They ask residents to follow specific guidelines such as evacuating during emergencies or managing waste properly. This communication, which we refer to as 'risk communication,' aims to reduce risk and promote disaster preparedness technologies among people at risk. However, it is important to realize that just sending out messages is not enough; effective communication is much more complex.

Imagine your school principal announces a fire drill, instructing everyone to exit the building calmly. While the message is clear, not everyone may take it seriously or know how to react effectively in real emergencies. Just like in our example, the public might ignore or misunderstand risk messages from local authorities.

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... the inclination; the tendency of the people to prepare against disaster is elusive, it is really low.

Despite significant investment in disaster preparedness campaigns, research indicates that people are often not as willing to prepare for disasters as expected. Many authorities assume that providing information alone will be sufficient to prompt action. However, the reality is that many people remain unprepared for disasters, which makes it appear that our communication efforts are falling short.

Consider a fire safety campaign where leaflets are distributed about fire exits and safety procedures. Even with this information, individuals might still neglect to familiarize themselves with these safety routes until a real emergency arises, demonstrating how simply sharing messages may not lead to meaningful preparedness.

Why people are not preparing?...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.

Individuals often misinterpret their level of risk and believe they are immune to disasters due to their knowledge or experience. For example, they may think that because they live in a seemingly safe area, they don't need to worry about natural disasters. This overconfidence prevents them from taking the necessary precautions.

Think of a person who has driven safely for years. They may feel invincible and ignore safety measures like wearing a seatbelt, believing an accident won't happen to them. Similarly, people often underestimate their vulnerability to disasters until they are faced with a real threat.

Or maybe people think that okay, it is also the responsibility of others like, people often blame the municipal authority for getting flood...it is the duty or responsibility of the local government to protect me.

Another barrier to disaster preparedness is that individuals may feel it is solely the responsibility of local authorities to manage risks or mitigate disaster impacts. They may believe that it is not their job to prepare for a disaster, which results in a lack of personal responsibility and action.

Imagine a group of students who believe that their teachers will always ensure their safety during school trips. If an emergency arises, many may hesitate to take action themselves because they feel it is the teachers' responsibility to keep them safe.

Here are some data we can see that, actually, ideally we should have more money should be invested on prevention and preparedness... government is also failing to spend money on preparedness, people are not motivated to do it.

There is often a significant discrepancy in how funding is allocated concerning disaster management. While more resources are commonly directed toward response efforts during emergencies, the necessary investment in prevention and preparedness tends to be overlooked. This lack of funding can contribute to lower levels of public preparedness and awareness.

Think about a community that only funds ambulance services during emergencies without investing in community health programs or wellness checks. Without proactive health measures, they might face more health crises, leading to a higher need for urgent care which could have been prevented.

Then, by the time this person realized, it is no more the 50 kilometre, it is 50 centimetre, he is inundated... So, in case of risk perception, always there is the question; who, what is risky, what extent is risky, why risky...what is effective, will it work.

The consequences of ineffective risk communication can be dire, as individuals may underestimate threats until it is too late. There is a continuous struggle to communicate risk effectively and ensure that people understand both the threats and the necessary actions to take. Questions around the effectiveness of preparedness measures and responsibility further complicate the issue.

Picture a weather app that sends out alerts but fails to convey the severity of a storm. People might dismiss the alert as just another warning, waiting until the rain starts pouring to realize that they should have taken shelter well before the storm began.

--