Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Abstract

Abstract Volcano disaster risk management during a crisis requires continuous and intensive risk communication with the public. However, to have the desired public response during a crisis, it is necessary to improve the community’s understanding of volcanoes. Knowledge, experience, risk perception, communication, and drills shape good community responses. These require a bottom-up process of communication and involvement of the community in decision-making and engagement with the government. Thus, proper crisis management requires top-down and bottom-up communication and joint work between the scientists, decision-makers, and the community. The response from the community can be improved through community-based preparedness with a culturally sensitive approach that facilitates a strong relationship and participation of community members according to their customs. The Wajib Latih Penanggulangan Bencana (WLPB: Compulsory Disaster Management Training Program) and the SISTER VILLAGE Program in the Merapi Volcano community are good examples of community-based preparation in Indonesia. An effective volcano early warning protocol includes risks analysis, volcano monitoring, hazards analysis and forecasting, dissemination of alerts and warnings, and community response according to the warning. Alert levels can also be increased during the unrest, so actions are also associated with this and not just related to the impacts of an eruption. Therefore, the alert level alone is not helpful if it is not appropriately communicated with an action plan in place to improve community awareness. Moreover, personal communication between scientists and decision-makers and between scientists and the community is essential to instill self-responsibility and a sense of belonging. Personal communication describes the trust of community members or certain decision-makers to scientists to obtain more detailed explanations of volcanic activity. Such communication is already occurring in communities that have experienced a long history of eruptions, and/or continuous eruptions, such as at Merapi and Sinabung volcanoes. The disaster management system in Indonesia includes institutions that manage science and institutions responsible for social aspects, such as evacuations, refugee handling, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA, Badan Nasional Bencana, BNPB in Bahasa Indonesia) of Indonesia coordinates all disasters to integrate management of and facilitate communication between stakeholders. In addition to a well-established system, effective and good disaster management needs to be supported by policies related to public needs before, during, and after the disaster. After disasters, a review of previous strategies is also necessary to develop a better strategy and obtain a better result. Establishing SISTER VILLAGES is an excellent strategy to meet the needs during a crisis. However, this needs to be supported by regulations related to collecting data, the evacuation process and facilitation, and infrastructure, communication, and coordination. Here, we present good risk communication practices around Indonesia's volcanoes related to how people receive and understand early warning information and take action with the support of the government through capacity improvement and learning from experiences.

Keywords

• Volcano
• Disaster management
• Early warning
• WLPB
• SISTER VILLAGE
• Communication