The Importance of Pre-Disaster Communications
By: Sambavi Jani
Tags: Disaster, Communication, People, Emergency, Technology

Disasters, by all accounts, can be chaotic and unpredictable. It is imperative for responding agencies and the public to have a two-way open line of communication. However, communications should not begin when an incident is occurring but rather long before a disaster occurs.

Communicating with the public before a disaster occurs builds the bridge of trust between the responding agencies (usually the government) and the residents of a community. Before a disaster, government agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can work together to provide preparedness tips for various disasters such as natural hazards and technological hazards — advice such as telling the residents the locations of an evacuation route or possible locations of shelters.

An example of two-way communication is, if the government posts a tip about evacuation zones on social media, any community member can comment or ask questions regarding the zone specified. The community can also suggest expanding zones or including neighborhoods not included in a zone to create a zone for them, etc.

During the response phase of a disaster, members of a community will already know where to go and their familiarity with response procedures can help limit confusion. Providing vital information demonstrates to members of a community the government cares about their safety and wellbeing, as well as creating an opportunity for members of a community to be active participants in the emergency management process. The government can also provide resources on how to identify false communications on various social media outlets (i.e. Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc.)

Communicating before a disaster also allows the public to understand their local government agency’s and other responding agency’s roles and responsibilities during a disaster. Roles and responsibilities can vary during times of “blue sky days’’ and during disaster events. Setting up booths and presenting at community events will allow the agencies to discuss how and why they perform specific tasks during a disaster. Residents can now know what to expect and the reasoning behind it.

Finally, communicating with the residents before an emergency can provide an opportunity for the responding agencies to understand the profile of their community. This will assist in providing the right resources required for their community during an event. Examples can include the average age of the community, languages spoken in households, how many have pets, how many have children, how many are part of the disabled and access and functional needs (D/AFN) population, overall environment makeup of the community, and access to transportation. Recognizing a community’s needs can determine the resources needed to ensure the community has what it needs to best respond to an emergency event. Learning the make-up of a community doesn’t need to be complicated and can be as simple as sending out a survey.

A commonly cited example of pre-disaster communications failure is Hurricane Katrina in 2005; more specifically, the evacuation decision-making process of the local government officials. A case study notes that the evacuation language pre-hurricane before landfall was vague and uncertain. Communication regarding evacuation from government leadership was not consistent and caused confusion among the residents of New Orleans. Mayor Nagin first recommended evacuation, then later urged voluntary evacuation while also telling residents to stock up on essential items (traditional signaling for a shelter-in-place directive). This prompted some residents to think it was safe to stay while introducing confusion into the situation.

Evacuation was finally ordered by the Governor of Louisiana 24 hours before landfall, a decision that many criticize as an insufficient time-frame for residents to leave the area safely. The lack of communication and the confusion it caused also caused a lack of trust with the citizens. In the same case study, the author notes that the Governor told some residents to wait at specific locations around the city where buses would transport them to shelters. However, many people arrived on foot because they did not trust who the evacuation messaging was coming from.

This example shows what can happen if trust and communications are not established before a disaster occurs. Successful communications can significantly impact the safety of an individual or community during disaster events. As it is well known, many people during Hurricane Katrina did not or could not evacuate for a number of reasons. Two-way communication between a government and those within its jurisdiction are critical, as the government is responsible for the awareness of and response to these challenges.

Communication, especially when information is constantly changing, is an essential piece to a community’s response. Building a bridge of trust will create a smooth transition from one phase to another and limiting the negative impacts of emergencies and disasters.

References

Cole, T. W., & Fellows, K. L. (2008). Risk Communication Failure: A Case Study of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. Southern Communication Journal, 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940802219702