
The infographic of the AI-Integrated Disaster Preparedness Platforms is shown as an infographic: AI-Integrated Disaster Preparedness Platforms

The infographic of the AI-Integrated Disaster Preparedness Platforms is shown as an infographic: AI-Integrated Disaster Preparedness Platforms

The infographic of the global trends of disasters (1970-2025) is shown as an infographic: https://disasters.weblike.jp/global%20trends.html

The infographic of the 1985 Mexico City Earthquake, mainly focusing on the social factors with earthquake characteristics, is shown as an infographic: http://disasters.weblike.jp/mexico%20infogr.html
The distance impact reminded me of the situation in Bangkok when an earthquake occurred in Myanmar in April 2025.

This infographic was presented at RIHN in Japan as part of the Prof. Ito project, as part of the Feasibility Study. The infographic website is: https://disasters.weblike.jp/IOT%20v2.html
The presented numbers should be confirmed. Especially, the foreigner’s death toll and the Thai national death toll, with their proportion, are under reinvestigation.
Growing up, many of us were taught that natural disasters are inevitable acts of nature beyond human control. This perspective changed dramatically for me when I started working at a research institute. My senior researcher emphatically told me, “The natural disaster is not natural.” This profound statement transformed my approach to disaster research, helping me understand that human decisions often determine whether natural hazards become catastrophic disasters.
The Forgotten Tragedy of Armero
On November 13, 1985, the Nevado del Ruiz volcano in Colombia erupted after 69 years of dormancy. The eruption triggered massive mudflows (lahars) that rushed down the volcano’s slopes, burying the town of Armero and claiming over 23,000 lives. This catastrophe stands as Colombia’s worst natural hazard-induced disaster and the deadliest lahar ever recorded.
What makes this tragedy particularly heartbreaking is its preventability. Scientists had observed warning signs for months, with seismic activity beginning as early as November 1984. By March 1985, a UN seismologist had observed a 150-meter vapor column erupting from the mountain and concluded that a major eruption was likely.
Despite these warnings, effective action to protect the vulnerable population never materialized. The devastation of Armero wasn’t simply the result of volcanic activity but the culmination of multiple human failures in risk communication, historical memory, and emergency response.
When Warning Systems Fail: Communication Breakdown
The Armero disaster epitomizes what disaster researchers call “cascading failures” in warning systems. Scientists had created hazard maps showing the potential danger to Armero in October 1985, just weeks before the eruption. However, these maps suffered from critical design flaws that rendered them ineffective.
One version lacked a clear legend to interpret the colored zones, making it incomprehensible to the general public. Devastatingly, Armero was placed within a green zone on some maps, which many residents misinterpreted as indicating safety rather than danger. According to reports, many survivors later recounted they had never even heard of the hazard maps before the eruption, despite their publication in several major newspapers.
As a disaster researcher, I’ve seen this pattern repeatedly: scientific knowledge fails to translate into public understanding and action. When I conducted fieldwork in flood-prone regions in Thailand, I discovered a similar disconnect between technical risk assessments and public perception. Effective disaster mitigation requires not just accurate information but information that is accessible and actionable for those at risk.
The Cultural Blindspots of Risk Perception
The tragedy of Armero illustrates how cultural and historical factors shape how communities perceive risk. Despite previous eruptions destroying the town in 1595 and 1845, causing approximately 636 and 1,000 deaths respectively, collective memory of these disasters had seemingly faded as the town was rebuilt in the same location.
In the hours before the disaster, when ash began falling around 3:00 PM, local leaders, including the town priest, reportedly advised people to “stay calm” and remain indoors. Some residents recall a priest encouraging them to “enjoy this beautiful show” of ashfall, suggesting it was harmless. These reassurances from trusted community figures likely discouraged self-evacuation that might have saved lives.
My research in disaster-prone communities has consistently shown that risk perception is heavily influenced by cultural factors, including trust in authority figures and historical experience with hazards. In Japan, for instance, the tsunami markers that indicate historic high-water levels serve as constant physical reminders of past disasters, helping to maintain community awareness across generations.
Systemic Failures and Institutional Response
The Armero tragedy wasn’t just a failure of risk communication or cultural blind spots—it revealed systemic weaknesses in disaster governance. Colombia was grappling with significant political instability due to years of civil war, potentially diverting governmental resources from disaster preparedness. Just a week before the eruption, the government was heavily focused on a guerrilla siege at the Palace of Justice in Bogotá.
Reports suggest there was reluctance on the part of the government to bear the potential economic and political repercussions of ordering an evacuation that might have proven unnecessary. This hesitation proved fatal when communication systems failed on the night of the eruption due to a severe storm, preventing warnings from reaching residents even after the lahars were already descending toward the town.
In my research examining large-scale flood disasters, I’ve found that effective disaster governance requires robust institutions that prioritize public safety over short-term economic or political considerations. My 2021 comparative analysis of major flood events demonstrated that preemptive protective actions consistently save more lives than reactive emergency responses, even when accounting for false alarms.
Learning from Tragedy: The Path Forward
The Armero disaster, while devastating, catalyzed significant advancements in volcano monitoring and disaster risk reduction globally. Colombia established specialized disaster management agencies with greater emphasis on proactive preparedness. The
Colombian Geological Service expanded from limited capacity to a network of 600 stations monitoring 23 active volcanoes.
The contrast with the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines demonstrates the impact of these lessons. There, timely forecasts and effective evacuation procedures saved thousands of lives. The memory of Armero remains a powerful reminder of the consequences of inadequate disaster preparedness.
As I’ve emphasized in my own research on disaster resilience in industrial complex areas, building sustainable communities requires integrating technical knowledge with social systems. My work developing social vulnerability indices demonstrates that effective disaster risk reduction must address both physical hazards and social vulnerabilities.
Remember, disasters may be triggered by natural events, but their impact is determined by human decisions. By learning from tragedies like Armero, we can create more resilient communities prepared to face future challenges.
From Tragedy to Leadership: The Birth of ADRC
The Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) was established in 1998 following the devastating Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake (commonly known as the Kobe Earthquake) that struck Japan in 1995. This catastrophic event became a catalyst for change, transforming how Japan—and later Asia—approached disaster management and resilience.
Kobe’s Remarkable Recovery Journey
Kobe’s recovery story stands as a powerful testament to resilience and strategic rebuilding. Within just 9 years after the earthquake, Kobe’s population returned to pre-disaster levels—an extraordinary achievement considering the scale of destruction. This recovery wasn’t merely about rebuilding structures but reimagining the city’s future role.
HAT Kobe: A Hub for Disaster Reduction Excellence
Today, Kobe has reinvented itself as a global center for disaster reduction policies and activities. The area known as HAT Kobe hosts numerous disaster-related organizations, including ADRC. The name “HAT” carries dual significance:
This wordplay perfectly captures Kobe’s transformation from a disaster-struck city to a knowledge hub that helps others prepare for and respond to unexpected disasters.
Learning From Kobe: A Model for Disaster Recovery
Kobe’s recovery process offers valuable lessons for communities worldwide facing similar challenges. The city demonstrates how effective post-disaster planning can transform tragedy into opportunity, creating not just infrastructure but institutional knowledge that benefits others.
ADRC’s Mission Across Asia
ADRC plays a vital role in sharing disaster reduction expertise with its member countries throughout Asia. The organization:
Resources for Disaster Management Professionals
ADRC maintains comprehensive resources that disaster management professionals can access:
These resources provide valuable insights into regional disaster management systems, country-specific approaches, and up-to-date information on current disaster situations across Asia.
Building Regional Resilience Together
Through organizations like ADRC and the example set by Kobe, Asian countries are developing stronger collaborative approaches to disaster risk reduction. By learning from past experiences and sharing knowledge, communities across the region are better prepared to face future challenges with resilience and determination.
As highlighted in the Bangkok Post article, “More must be done to fight climate change“, Thailand faces significant challenges from various natural disasters. This analysis presents a national risk assessment mapping to help identify priority areas for disaster management.
Table 1 Disaster data in Thailand

The EM-DAT database analysis covers disasters from 1900 to 2014. Notably, the most severe impacts—measuring deaths, affected populations, and economic damage—have occurred primarily since the 1970s. Two catastrophic events stand out in Thailand’s disaster history:
These events have dramatically shaped Thailand’s approach to disaster risk management.

Figure 1 National Risk Assessment Mapping in Thailand
The above visualization presents Thailand’s risk assessment map created using EM-DAT data spanning 1900-2014. This frequency-impact analysis by damage type offers a straightforward yet comprehensive overview of Thailand’s disaster risk landscape.
To properly contextualize these risks, we employ two complementary evaluation matrices:

Figure 2 Risk matrix options (1)

Figure 3 Risk matrix options (2)
The risk assessment mapping (Figure 1) clearly identifies flooding as Thailand’s most critical disaster risk requiring immediate attention and resources. According to the evaluation matrices shown in Figures 2 and 3, flood events necessitate:
This preliminary analysis serves as a foundation for more detailed research. A report for the conference (Conference: 13th International Conference on Thai Studies) has published a more comprehensive examination of these findings.
Additional Resources
For more information on disaster risk reduction in Southeast Asia, visit the natural hazards research journal (open access) .
One of the most significant volcanic disasters we must know about is the 1985 Nevado del Ruiz volcano eruption. Approx.23000 citizens in Armero city were dead. The cultural aspects were embedded in this disaster. The disaster was predicted. The hazard maps indicate that the city will be affected by a volcanic eruption and lahars. Both priest and mayor told the citizens to stay in the same place because they were afraid of panic before the time, but did not tell them to evacuate. That made tragedy. The people in the city tended to follow both persons because of the culture, which is a religious and vertically structured society. There were also other factors*.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevado_del_Ruiz#Eruption_and_lahars
Winter’s beauty can turn dangerous with heavy snow, blizzards, and ice storms. These snow disasters cause power outages, transportation chaos, and property damage. But what causes them, and how can we prepare?
The Science of Snowstorms
Snow disasters happen when cold temperatures, precipitation, and wind combine. Think of heavy snowfall, icy roads, and massive snowdrifts. Climate change is making things worse with more intense snow and hazardous ice.
The Impact
Snow disasters disrupt transportation, causing accidents and delays. Power lines snap under the weight of snow, leading to blackouts. Buildings can even collapse, and ice dams cause leaks and damage.
Fighting Back: Snow Removal and Prevention
Traditional methods like shoveling and plowing are still essential. But we now have snowblowers, snowmelt systems, and de-icing techniques. Advanced weather prediction helps us prepare, and GPS-guided snowplows clear roads faster.
Be Prepared!
Even with the best technology, snowstorms can still hit hard. Have an emergency kit with food, water, blankets, and a first aid kit. Plan for transportation and communication in case of an emergency.
Stay safe and warm this winter!
# Image Source: Unsplash

The picture was taken in Mississippi on December 3, 2005.
Nearly two decades have passed since Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, particularly New Orleans, in 2005. As we reflect on this catastrophic event, it’s crucial to reassess our understanding of the disaster, its impacts, and the lessons learned for future disaster risk reduction efforts. This updated analysis incorporates new research, recent case studies, and current best practices in disaster management to provide a comprehensive view of Hurricane Katrina’s long-lasting effects and implications for disaster preparedness.
Revisiting the Data: The Importance of Pre-Disaster Information
One of the most valuable resources for understanding the pre-Katrina landscape was the Greater New Orleans Community Data Center (GNOCDC) website. This data repository provided detailed demographic and socioeconomic information at the parish and ward levels, offering crucial insights into the social fabric of affected areas.
Key Findings from Pre-Katrina Data
The Victimization Process: A Multi-Stage Analysis
Understanding the disaster’s impact requires examining multiple stages of the event and its aftermath. Building on the original five-stage model (Pre-disaster, Direct Damage, Social Disorder, Life Environment, and Reconstruction and Recovery), recent research has emphasized the interconnectedness of these stages and their long-term implications.
Updated Insights on Disaster Stages
Emerging Trends in Disaster Risk Reduction
Since Hurricane Katrina, several key trends have emerged in the field of Disaster Risk Reduction:
Actionable Recommendations
Based on lessons learned from Katrina and subsequent disasters, here are key recommendations for enhancing disaster resilience:
The tragedy of Hurricane Katrina continues to offer valuable lessons for disaster risk reduction. By combining data-driven analysis with a nuanced understanding of social and environmental factors, we can work towards creating more resilient communities. As we face increasing challenges from climate change and urban growth, the insights gained from studying Katrina’s impact remain crucial for shaping effective disaster management strategies worldwide.
Hurricane Katrina Disaster Research conducted by NIED(in Japanese)
You cannot copy content of this page