Day two of the summer course could be introduced with the two key terms “urban planning” and “case study”. These describe the broader content of all four lectures today dealing with the context of Malaysia, Thailand, Japan and Indonesia. Another interesting thing to notice was the included definitions of key words such as disaster, risk, vulnerability and capacity in most lectures. This makes sense though, if one considers that there exists several kind of definitions and people use different ones.
The day’s first lecture was given by Dr. Muna Sarimin and was about Disaster Risk Management using the case example of Malaysian Urban Case Study. Accordingly, she listed the different kind of disasters commonly occurring in Malaysia followed up by several things to consider when dealing with these. One example is formulated through an executive order by the prime minister. The action of bringing back the situation to normalcy is pointed out by Dr. Muna Sarimin in particular. In relation to this it can be highlighted that a challenge is that some things cannot simply be brought back through for instance money. Meant is here the emotional lost, such as the sense of home. This kind of loss must be restored by using emotional support or to put it succinctly, trauma-counseling.
The next lecturer was Dr. Passanan Assaravak, telling about her experience of floodings in Thailand. The case example used here were the flooding in Bangkok 2011. Consequences of this event were inter alia depression and distress, public panic and disease. As an important source of help, physically and psychologically, she identifies the engaging with other affected people such as neighbors which, even though they did not know each other from before, got to do exactly this. This made it possible for people to cope in several ways. One highlight of this lecture was the example of exchanging the word “flood”, which people have a bad attitude towards, with the word “whale”, towards what people have a more positive attitude. The purpose of exchanging these was to keep people calm while educating them about floods.
The second lecture was followed by lunch, certainly looked forward to by most participants, comprising a large range of Indonesian deli. After lunch the participants still had a bit more time to socialize while enjoying a cup of tea or coffee.
Heading into the third lecture filled with restored energy the participants were introduced by Dr. Piyapong Janmaimool which would be talking about Disaster Risk Communication by using Case Studies in Thailand and Japan as examples. As the name of the session already suggested, the topic which made this one unique from others was the focus on Disaster Risk Communication. To start of one measure which could be identified as a way of passive
communication are public evacuation maps found in Japan. Furthermore, citizen participation in DRM is generally promoted by the government. Other things to consider in communication are the inclusion of multiple stakeholders, and the adaptation of the type of communication to the specific phase of a disaster. Common information to include is the time and place of a disaster for instance and the communication can happen in a formal or informal setting.
Ultimately, the consequence of well conducted disaster risk communication can be increasing of self protection, hence decreasing risk.
The following coffee break was also used by social activities in order to give the participants the possibility to get to know each other little bit further. Walking around talking to each other, they were given the task to remember the names and country of origin of their fellow participants. These were then tested about their memory, leading to a challenge with further questions if they did not remember information asked for.
Last but not least, Danang Samsurizal, employee of the local disaster response organization BPBD, was briefing the class on the situation of major disasters in Yogjakarta, comprising the earthquake in 2006 and the eruption of the volcano Mount Merapi in 2010, which both claimed a lot of lives and led to destruction of a lot of homes. After giving some information on local philosophies of how to respond to disaster, Danang Samsurizal described the process
of housing reconstruction cycle. This was backed up by photos of the actual reconstruction work, giving a good visual understanding. The second day of the course certainly gave the participants further insight into relevant contexts in matters of DRR.