Southeast Asia faces constant threats from natural disasters, but recent research shows its people feel better prepared than many others around the globe. This mixed bag of high risk and high readiness is highlighted by the World Risk Poll, conducted by Gallup and commissioned by the Lloyd's Register Foundation.
According to the poll, roughly two-thirds of Southeast Asians believe they could protect themselves and their families from disasters like earthquakes and tsunamis. The survey gathered insights from 1,000 respondents across 142 countries, with many citing social media and local government alerts as key sources of early warnings.
Key findings reveal more than 74% of adults from Southeast Asia reported receiving at least one disaster alert before facing calamity, surpassing the global average of 70%. This is significant, considering the region's history with frequent natural disasters including typhoons, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.
Experts note Southeast Asia has made substantial strides thanks to its focus on disaster risk reduction and resilient communities. Benedict Vigers, Gallup's research consultant, emphasized the importance of effective early warning systems and community-level preparedness.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) contributes to these efforts through regional collaboration and funding access for disaster management. Vigers pointed out, “Southeast Asia shows the world how resilience can thrive even outside high-income countries.”
Interestingly, wealth seems not to dictate disaster preparedness, with lower-middle-income countries like the Philippines, Vietnam, and Cambodia ranking high on household planning and individual agency scores. This contradicts general assumptions about resilience correlatively growing with national wealth.
For example, 87% of Filipinos reported experiencing at least one natural disaster within the past five years. Remarkably, 84% of households there reportedly have emergency plans.
These findings suggest the region’s high exposure to natural disasters drives its readiness. Even with frequent threats, many families have learned to prioritize advance planning amid the ambiguity of future hoaxes.
Despite prevalent positivity, experts warn against overconfidence. Daniel Aldrich, director of resilience studies program at Northeastern University, cautioned against conflated perceptions of preparedness with actual readiness.
“There's a big difference between imagined preparedness, reported preparedness, and actual state of readiness,” he said, urging communities to focus on upgrades like better infrastructure and reliable financial support.
Challenges remain; inadequate early warning systems have hindered some communities. Isabelle Baguisi from the Plan Philippines flood resilience project indicated poor infrastructure still leaves gaps in sufficient disaster warnings.
While many feel empowered, it's clear systemic issues linger. During Typhoon Gaemi, some residents received little or no alerts about flooding, highlighting areas for improvement.
Fiscal stability impacts the capacity for households to prepare. The World Risk Poll indicated financial resilience fell from 30% to 35% since 2021, limiting many families' access to adequate disaster kits or communication devices necessary during emergencies.
Australia's disaster preparedness has ignited comparisons, with experts advocating for improvements inspired by Southeast Asia’s lessons. Rowena Maguire from the Queensland University of Technology pointed out gaps exist across government and private sectors.”
She remarked, “Our laws and policies talk about resilience, but nobody defines it, leading to inconsistencies when disaster strikes.”
Despite sophistication, Australia's response and recovery plans were deemed inadequate during incidents like the 2022 floods, costing the economy billions. The significant damage, totaling $4.8 billion, underlines the need for improved frameworks for disaster management.
Maguire urges significant adjustments, especially to embrace community organizations as first responders, saying they carry the heavy burden during crises. Nevertheless, such groups often operate under-resourced and less recognized.
Comparatively, some of Southeast Asia's most vulnerable regions, such as Indonesia and the Philippines, have made drastic strides, counteracting the idea of “disaster fatigue.” Leaders argue, community engagement and mobilization-inspired strategic frameworks present solutions applicable to other nations.
Maguire states, “The frameworks we observe elsewhere effectively incorporate community preparedness,” referencing effective climate policy approaches like those observed in Fiji. Emphasizing adaptation blending with mitigation offers concrete strategies for pragmatic infrastructure changes and emergency strategies.
Underpinning this dialogue is the pressing reality of climate change. Rising global temperatures exacerbate the frequency and severity of natural disasters.
Following previous catastrophes, affected countries stand wiser and more committed to improving infrastructure and community preparedness. For many nations affected by the Boxing Day tsunami of 2004, their realizations have led to landmark transformations.
The survey results solidify the narrative: Southeast Asia serves as both vulnerable and vigilant. This juxtaposition makes it ripe for sharing its experiences with the broader world, paving the way for global resilience against the increasing frequency of natural disasters influenced by climate change.
Moving forward, countries everywhere must analyze these insights for greater preparedness strategies. Understanding nuanced factors spurring community resilience could fundamentally shift disaster management policies so people feel safer regardless of their geographical vulnerability.
