Learning from Failures in Disaster Response

This SciDev.net editorial explores science communication in the context of two recent disasters - cyclone Nargis in Myanmar and the earthquake in Sichuan province, China - to highlight the need for effective dissemination of information about prevention and mitigation, both before and after a disaster. Accurate communication of information is crucial, the authors hold, if the impact of major disasters is to be minimised and if government officials are to be held accountable for their efforts - or lack thereof.

In the case of Myanmar, "it is clear that the country lacks the comprehensive communication infrastructure - and perhaps even the political will - to ensure that information about impending disasters reaches the areas where it is most needed." Reportedly, there was no mechanism for rapidly communicating warnings about the imminent cyclone to those most in danger. Then, in the aftermath of the disaster, state-run television broadcast images of the country's prime minister "visiting a few hastily erected camps for survivors - all looking remarkably well-fed...[a choice which] is far less likely to generate internal criticism than film of bloated bodies and starving children almost three weeks after the cyclone."

In contrast, the authors note that China's government was praised for the speed with which it acknowledged the size of the disaster and submitted its rescue efforts to international scrutiny. Rather than insisting that queries from local journalists be directed to government officials, earthquake specialists opened themselves up to queries - as required by a law on public access to information which had recently come into effect.

However, the authors caution that there is no guarantee that the scientists who have made themselves accessible to the media in an emergency situation will maintain this attitude in less urgent times. Thus, the authors urge that scientific institutions be trained to release information in a fast and comprehensible way. They also argue that science journalists must be trained to make their own judgments about when to trust apparently scientific statements. They need to be supported in carrying out probing journalism into issues such as why so many schools collapsed in the China disaster, particularly when buildings around them often remained standing. "In many cases, the problems appear to have been caused not by a lack of scientific or technical information, but by a failure to put information to use."

In short, the authors urge that science communicators have an important role in providing citizens with the information they need to protect themselves against disasters, identifying the political or other obstacles that prevent this information from getting through or being put into practice. They caution against attempts to impose heavy-handed restrictions on the coverage of disasters: As citizens learn more about the reality of the situation, the less confidence they will have in those who tell them that the situation is different.