Filipinos Perception About Flood Warning Systems and Their Behavior Towards Early Evacuation

Cherry May R. Mateo1, *) and Taikan Oki1)

1) Oki Lab, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tokyo Be607, IIS, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku. Tokyo 153-8505, Japan e-mail: cherry.m@rainbow.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Abstract Extreme weather disturbances that frequently occur in the Philippines cause extensive floods. To prevent extensive flood damages, NDRRMC and PAGASA release forecasts and early warning by means of flood bulletins to the public and local governments. However, hydrometeorological disasters in the Philippines continue to top global and national disasters lists in terms of people killed and economical damages. It seems that these warning systems do not reach the intended beneficiaries the general public. This study aims to know if the current warning systems are deemed to be effective by the public. A 10-item online survey was conducted to understand the Filipinos perception of flood warning systems and their behavior towards early evacuation. Of the 207 respondents to the survey, 78% of those who have experienced flooding said they did not receive any early warning or flood bulletins. Of those who received flood warning, 85% said they received the notice during and not before the flood event. Only 8% said that the information accessible to them is sufficient. This study reveals that although the existing warning systems are technologically relevant, they fail to protect the public because they are not aware that such systems exist. The survey results were used to come up with recommendations for developing a flood warning system that is more sensitive to the publics needs. Keywords: Philippines, flood bulletins, warning systems, public perception, evacuation

1. Introduction According to EM-DAT International Disasters Statistics, storms and flood top the natural disasters statistics in terms of numbers of people killed and economical damages (Illustration 1). This could be attributed to Philippines' geographical location - it is located in the typhoon belt of the Pacific. Philippines is affected by the Intertropical Convergence Zone, the Northeast Monsoon from November to April, and the Southwest Monsoon from May to October. Annually, an average of 956mm-4064mm of rain falls in the Philippines. These occurrences of heavy precipitation often lead to swelling of water bodies and flooding.

Illustration 1.Top Natural Disasters in Philippines from 1900 to 2011

The government agencies mainly assigned for hydrometeorological disasters are PAGASA and National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC). Severe weather and flood forecasting information are disseminated as in the diagram shown in Illustration 2. However, due to lack of funds, DZCA or the PAGASA radio is currently not functional. PAGASA measures and monitors flood situation in major urban areas and the four major river basins of the Philippines. Flood forecasts and hydrological warnings are generated by the Flood Forecasting Branch. Flood bulletins are released based on the severity of the anticipated floods Flood Outlook for regions that could possibly experience deteriorating conditions, Flood Advisory for regions where flooding is imminent and Flood Warning for regions where flooding Illustration 2. Severe weather warning dissemination scheme in will surely occur. It is stated in the PAGASA website that Flood Warnings the Philippines should be issued at least 24 hours before flooding occurs. Even if these forecasting and warning schemes do exist, it is still surprising that hydrometeorological disasters continue to top the list of local and global disasters in the Philippines. It is equally perplexing to find several video footages of Filipinos on top of their inundated houses or any other elevated places such as electrical posts, waiting for rescuers to help them or for the flood water to subside. It is also bothering to find video footages of continuously rising flood water inside a Filipino's home. This study aims to understand why Filipinos continue to severely suffer from flooding even if warning systems do exist. Specifically, this study aims to find out if the mode of warning dissemination, its contents and its time of release are relevant to the public. It also aims to understand the Filipinos' behavior towards early evacuation. Understanding the Filipinos' perception of flood warning and evacuation would enable disaster planners and government agencies to adapt better warning dissemination schemes and plans in the future. Any disaster plan that takes the public's perception for granted would eventually lead to its misuse or disuse. 2. Materials and methods A 10-item online survey was made through surveymonkey.com and could be accessed in this link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/YXPWD55. According to a website that distributes social media statistics (www.socialbakers.com/facebook-statistics), there are around 26,752,000 Facebook users in the Philippines or 26.78% of penetration of total population of the country and 90.07% of online population. Due to the popularity of Facebook, it was used as one of the media for distributing the said survey. The said link was also distributed through various personal email groups. The survey was opened only to Filipinos and was conducted from July 23-25 2011.

The first question asked if the respondent have experienced moderate to heavy flooding which is officially defined as 0.5m or more of inundation by PAGASA. The next 5 questions were about the early warnings accessed by or received by the respondent on or before the flood event, their mode of dissemination, information contents, accessibility and timeliness. Question 7 asked if the respondent know of any other early warning system used in the Philippines. The next question asked about the respondent's preferred mode of dissemination and the kind of flood information that he/she would want to receive. The last two questions asked about the respondent's behavior towards early evacuation during moderate to heavy flooding. A brief examination of several flood bulletins was done in order to understand the differences between the Filipinos perception and the current warning system. 3. Results and discussion There were 207 respondents when the results were compiled on July 25, 2011. Of these respondents, 65% said they have experienced moderate (0.5m-1.5m inundation) to high (more than 1.5m inundation) flood event. Of those who have been flooded, 78% said they did not receive any flood warning or any kind of advisory. Of those who were fortunate to receive flood warning, only 15% said they received the warning before flooding occurred.
Q: Have you ever experienced moderate* to high* flood event?
Q: Have you received any warning or flood bulletin on or before those flood events? 21.52%
34.78%
Yes No

Q: When did you receive the flood warning? 15.45%

Yes No

Before During

65.22%

78.48%

84.55%

Illustration 3. Percent of respondents who have experienced flooding

Illustration 4. Percent of respondents with flood experience who have received flood warning

Illustration 5. Timeliness of the received flood warning

The most common source of information is family members instead of official and direct Illustration 6. What kind of information did the flood warning contain? announcements from the government. The third most popular source of information is 100 80 government agencies via the internet. These 60 flood warnings (orange total, green 40 message from relatives and friends, blue 20 0 from government agencies via the internet, Places that Estimated flood Accessible Estimated time violet via social networking services, red would be level evacuation before flooding flooded centers occurs via community warning system, blue via radio/tv announcements) contain information about places that would be flooded and estimated flood level. A few said the information contains accessible evacuation centers and estimated time before flooding occurs. It should be

noted however that actual Flood Bulletins 1 do not contain estimated flood level, accessible evacuation centers and estimated time before flooding occurs for most regions. The Flood Bulletins do contain current water level, not flood level, at some monitoring station in affected major river basins. Illustration 7 reveals that even if some people say that they have received flood information by various means, only 8% think that the information they can get is sufficient. Illustration 8 shows the types of information and mode of dissemination of flood warning that they would want to receive (dark blue total, violet radio or TV announcements, red sms from an official disaster agency, green- via the internet by checking a centralized information system, blue via social networking systems). This result is interesting as even if Philippines is named as the text capital of the world (country with the most number of SMS messages sent everyday) by several international surveys and have very high internet and social networking penetration, the traditional means of disseminating information via radio and television remains to be the most preferred mode of information dissemination.
Q: Do you think the flood information accessible to you is sufficient? 7.76% 26.72%
Yes No Somehow
160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Q: If a new flood warning system would be developed, how would you want to receive the alert and what kind of information would you want to receive?

65.52%

Places that would be flooded

Estimated time Estimated flood before flooding level occurs

Accessible evacuation centers

Illustration 7. Adequacy of the accessible flood warning information

Illustration 8. Preferred information content and mode of dissemination

Even if social networking services are very popular in the Philippines, it is not the preferred means of receiving disaster information (as what is now being done by NDCC via Twitter). As the PAGASA Radio had not been in use for several years and NDRRMC doesn't have its own disaster radio or TV Station, it is advisable to have a stronger collaboration between these government agencies and the private radio and TV companies. The Flood Bulletins, the main source of information which is released via the internet for direct public access seem to be ignored. Illustration 9 shows that only 23% of Filipinos would definitely evacuate to designated places even if flood water exceeds 0.5m. This is a serious problem for disaster agencies. All Flood Bulletins emphasize that proactive actions evacuation rather than rescue should be taken but it seems that there are a lot of reasons for the public to do otherwise. Security of house is the top reason for not evacuating. However, it could be noted that the 4 th reason is that the respondent's house is multi-storey. It could be said that most of those whose main concern is the security of their house are affluent, live in a multi-storey house and do not need to

Official Flood Bulletins and Flood Advisories could be accessed http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3

through

this link:

evacuate. A survey that takes into account the social status and the elevation of the respondent's house could clarify this issue.
Q: Why do most people not evacuate before or during a flood event?
Q: If flood level in your vicinity exceeds 0.5m, would you and your family evacuate to a nearby evacuation center?
22.79% 42.65% Security of house/ property (i.e. burglars) Uncertainty of expected flood level - might subside Evacuation centers are poorly maintained Individual or family's house is multi-storey Location of nearby evacuation center is unknown Safety of all family members have to be ensured first Does not know when is the right time to leave Inconvenient/ over-packed evacuation centers More dangerous to go outside Hassle of packing up and thinking what to bring

Yes No Maybe
34.56%

50

100

150

Illustration 9. Evacuation behavior of Filipinos

Illustration 10. Reasons why most Filipinos refuse to evacuate to safer places during moderate to severe floods

The second most popular reason, uncertainty of expected flood level water level might subside soon, reflects the Filipinos' relaxed and positive nature which works against them during disasters. Unless they are sure that their houses would be flooded, they refuse to evacuate to safer places. The last three reasons are other answers provided by the respondents. Contents of two flood bulletins for the same basin and for the same weather disturbance could be seen in the Appendix 1A and 1B. These flood bulletins were released at a 12-hr interval. It could be noticed that the river situations have greatly changed within 12 hours. However, the public warnings part had not changed. It could also be observed that information dissemination beyond web announcements, evacuation preparations and decisions are given to the local disaster councils. This idea of decentralization is ideal if all the local disaster councils or local governments have the capability to carry out these tasks. However, only a few districts in the Philippines have their own community disaster plan and warning system. This leaves a big population of the Philippines dependent on these ambiguous web announcements which are difficult to find and access from the internet.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations The results of this survey consistently reveal that even if flood warning systems exist, most Filipinos are not aware of their existence. Flood bulletins and warnings are readily available in the internet so people who could answer an online survey should be able to find the said warnings. However, the availability of these flood warnings is not well publicized, difficult to find and access, its dissemination heavily depends on regional or smaller units of disaster coordinating councils, and its contents quite vague. Illustration 10 shows that the public wants to get as much information as they could by radio, TV and SMS. The government must take this into account in order to reach as many people as possible in revising the dissemination scheme of disasters warning. The public seems reluctant to use online means of dissemination as such needs constant and proactive seeking of information from the web whereas radio, TV and SMS are more versatile and passive information dissemination media.

Aside from the means of information dissemination, the government also has to examine its evacuation plan. It is reiterated that evacuation is preferred over rescue operation but the study shows that the public would not really evacuate for several reasons. It could be concluded however that most of the reasons for refusing to evacuate could be solved with proper education and dissemination of forecasts. To the public, the information they currently receive leaves a lot of uncertainties that they believe it is better to wait for the flood water to subside instead of choosing the safer option which is to flee. More accurate and timely information could be provided only if the flood forecasting capabilities could be improved. This study revealed that there is still a lot to be desired from the current flood warning system of the Philippines. It is important that the publics perspective or the social aspect of disaster mitigation be always considered in any disaster management strategy. Failing to do so would result to government projects and efforts that do not really serve majority of the population.

5. Acknowledgment This study is a part of a final report delivered in Urban Disaster Mitigation class in University of Tokyo, Department of Civil Engineering. The main author would like to acknowledge her professors, Meguro-sensei and Ohara-sensei, for their invaluable comments and encouraging words in writing this report. Acknowledgments are also given to the author's friends and colleagues who have helped spread the link to the survey.

6. References Asian Disaster Preparedness Center ( July 2002). Overview of Early Warning Systems for Hydrometeorological Hazards in Selected Countries in Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Philippines and Vietnam). Mateo, C.M. (2011). Flood Warning Systems Available to Filipinos and the Filipinos Evacuation Behavior (survey results). www.surveymonkey.com. Web. 25 July 2011. National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC). (2009) Flod Advisory/ Flod Bulletin. http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/. Web. 27 July 2011. Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). (n.d.) Hydrometeorology and Flood Forecasting Website. http://kidlat.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/ffb/ffb.html. Web. 27 July 2011. Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). (n.d.) Important Facts About Tropical Cyclones in the Philippines. http://kidlat.pagasa.dost.gov.ph. Web. 27 July 2011.

Appendix 1 Contents of Flood Bulletins Released at Different Times and Flooding Situation for the Same Weather Disturbance A. Flood Bulletin Number 2 Released on October 9 2011, 2:00PM

B. Flood Bulletin Number 3 Released on October 10 2011, 2:00AM