The long road to resilience: Why disaster preparedness still falling short

Despite years of significant investments in disaster preparedness, many vulnerabilities still persist, especially in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). This ongoing challenge is driven by several factors that require closer examination.

First, it’s critical to recognize the successes that have been accomplished. One significant achievement is integrating the concept of disaster risk reduction (DRR) into national and international development processes. For instance, at the 2016 Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (AMCDRR), the Indian prime minister presented an extensive 10-point program. Putting disaster risk management into the nation’s development plan was the primary focus of this initiative. On the global stage, frameworks like the Sendai Framework for DRR, the Hyogo Framework for Action, and the Paris Agreement have pushed for a more inclusive, problem-solving approach to disaster risk management.

The shift from a response-driven approach to one focused on risk reduction and preparedness has been widely praised. But this raises an important question—can we afford to move away from response strategies? Or should there be a balance between investments in both disaster preparedness and response? Given the complexities of climate change and the evolving nature of hazards, it would be unwise to assume we can eliminate disaster risks completely. Thus, investments in response mechanisms including recovery that reduce future vulnerabilities remain crucial. Unfortunately, efforts to fund recovery from disasters have been minimal.

Governance and coordination issues remain a significant barrier. The lack of effectiveness of disaster preparedness programme is caused by both the working in silos culture of many government departments and the lack of institutional coherence. Departments in charge of critical supplies and infrastructure often work independently, which hampers their capacity to collaborate efficiently. Furthermore, disaster response is frequently considered as an add-on rather than a primary duty for important stakeholders focusing on critical infrastructure, and resource allocation often fails to have a connection to demands posed by disasters.

Fixing the ingrained problems with governance, resource distribution, education, vulnerability assessment, and technical limitations will be crucial for improving disaster preparedness. Building resilience in LMICs and improving protection for vulnerable populations in the wake of future disasters will be made possible by a strategic approach supported by research and policy improvements.

Overlooked Areas in Disaster Preparedness: Infrastructure and Technical Sectors

Traditionally, emergency response and community outreach have been among the primary objectives of disaster preparedness. However, especially when it comes to disaster planning and training, critically important sectors like energy, transportation, and telecommunications tend to be forgotten. This oversight hampers the effectiveness of both disaster response and recovery efforts.

Telecommunications

During disasters, telecommunications are critical as they let responders to plan their actions and interact with impacted populations. Still, a lot of telecom firms fail to include crisis scenarios and coordination with disaster nodal bodies into their operations plans. Because of this, these systems frequently do not have the durability required in catastrophe situations, which results in communication breakdowns at times of greatest need. Recent urban floods have highlighted this gap in preparedness. With the launch of Sachet, the national disaster alert portal, and the integration of early warning systems with telecommunications networks, there is hope that timely alerts will reach the last mile.

Electricity and Energy Supply

Reliable electricity is essential for powering emergency services, hospitals, and communication systems during disasters. In 2019, Cyclone Fani caused extensive damage to power infrastructure in the state of Odisha, India. In response to these challenges, the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI) has launched a three-phase study to improve the resilience of the power infrastructure sector in Odisha, ensuring that the region’s energy system can better withstand future disasters.
Despite these efforts, energy infrastructure continues to be unprepared for extreme weather events or seismic activities. Energy providers frequently lack disaster-specific training to maintain service during emergencies or restore power after outages. While smart grid technologies could enhance resilience, they are rarely prioritized in disaster preparedness plans.

Transportation Infrastructure

Roads, bridges, and public transit systems are instances of transportation networks that are essential to relief delivery and evacuation. Dedicated Freight Corridors (DFC), such as the Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor (EDFC) running from Ludhiana in Punjab to Dankuni in West Bengal, are designed to withstand challenges like flooding, seismic activity, and other natural disasters. However, more such initiatives are needed to enhance the resilience of transportation networks across regions.

Despite their importance, these industries often do not engage in scenario planning or disaster preparedness training. There is a lack of preparedness for post-disaster damage assessment and recovery logistics given that many transportation infrastructures have not been evaluated for their vulnerability to certain hazards.

Technological Integration Gaps

Technologies like Geographic Information Systems (GIS), drones, and the Internet of Things (IoT) can greatly enhance disaster preparedness. Unfortunately, they are underutilized by critical infrastructure sectors. GIS can help identify vulnerable areas and improve resource allocation during emergencies. Drones can assess damage rapidly, aiding in fast response. However, a lack of training in these technologies among infrastructure personnel limits their effectiveness in disaster situations.

Public-Private Partnerships

Engaging the private sector is crucial for bringing creative approaches to disaster readiness. Effective public-private partnerships do not, however, always exist. The absence of structured structures for collaboration between public organizations and private sector infrastructure providers keeps these partnerships from reaching their maximum efficiency.

Recommendations for Improvement
To address the gaps in disaster preparedness, it’s essential to create comprehensive training programs that include all critical infrastructure sectors. These programs should promote collaboration among stakeholders to ensure a unified response during crises.

Also, infrastructure vulnerabilities must be assessed regularly, with a focus on specific hazards that each sector may face. This will help inform planning and better resource allocation in disaster preparedness.

Furthermore, investing in advanced technologies like GIS, drones, and IoT should be a priority. These tools improve situational awareness and communication during disasters, which ultimately strengthens response coordination.

There also needs to be frameworks to build collaboration between public agencies and private entities. These partnerships can drive innovation in disaster management practices, improving overall resilience.

Conclusion

To increase resilience, it is important that we plug the gaps in disaster preparedness, particularly across technical fields. The ability of a community to respond to disasters can be greatly improved by including transportation, energy supply, telecommunications, and water management into disaster preparedness plans. Communities will be less susceptible and more resistant to future disasters if these sectors become stronger alongside significant governance and technology issues are resolved.

The author is humanitarian and development professional.