Using Chaos Theory To Analyze Indonesia's Devastating 2018 Earthquake And Tsunami
Martha Yerxa
Northeastern University
Introduction
My paper was based off of the Sulawesi/Palu earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia this past year. This crisis falls under the category of “natural disaster” and was one of the most devastating natural disasters of the year, with thousands of lives lost. When beginning my research, I primarily looked at studies on similar cases such as the 2010 earthquake in Haiti and Hurricane Katrina. After reflecting upon these case studies, I researched Chaos Theory in order to integrate this into how natural disasters unfold in a complex way. The key principles of the theory include the sensitive dependence on initial conditions, system bifurcation and self-organization. These stages of chaos during a crisis are the radical disruption and then the natural reorganization of an organization's typical state. I then analyzed how Indonesia communicated about the earthquake and tsunami and what kind of history the country has with similar disasters.
I found that although Indonesia is placed in one of the most dangerous areas in the world, it still lacks both funding and adequate communication for crises like the one I unpacked. One major gap in communication that I found was that Sulawesi (the island in Indonesia that the earthquake hit) had almost no working tsunami detection devices and the agency responsible for warning the public did not think the tsunami would be substantial. Not warning the public of a tsunami is a big issue, especially in an area and time when a tsunami is very likely. I found that the deaths that came from this lack of warning may have resulted because of the public perception of natural disasters in the community. My crisis communication plan aims to shape public perception to care more about natural disasters so that they can better prepare for them.
Review of Literature
After researching and reviewing the literature on topics related to Chaos Theory and communication about natural disasters, I found that some issues were explored more than others. Scholarly literature on related topics focuses on communication patterns and strategies before, during and after a disaster by recommending guidelines and incorporating case studies such as Hurricane Katrina.
One of the areas of research I looked into is about sending out communication before a disaster strikes. Paton and Johnson’s article in 2001 analyzes how people respond to warning messages about natural disasters. In addition to explaining ways that people are given education and warning about these disasters, the article introduces a model for promoting preparatory behavior in a community (Paton, & Johnston, 2001). Social media also plays a huge role in allowing people to respond to and prepare for disasters. One article notes that people used Twitter during this disaster to do five main things: share an opinion, give a situation update, give general information on the disaster, share their emotions or call for action (Acar, et al., 2011). People go to sites like Twitter in order to learn about the nature of a coming disaster, the aftermath and also for personal reasons (Acar, et al., 2011). For example, people use these outlets to let friends and family know whether they are safe or unsafe (Acar, et al., 2011). One issue with prepping the public is that sending out messages can sometimes give the idea that the crisis is being handled and that it’s not a real danger (Paton, & Johnston, 2001). Social Media can also be a tool for communicating to the affected public to help them before, during and after the disaster.
In terms of warning the public of extreme events, literature analyzes different strategies for warning the public about both natural and technical disasters (Mayhorn, & McLaughlin, 2014). One article is particularly concerned with defining the sources, channels and content of the messages (Mayhorn, & McLaughlin, 2014). For instance, the article notes it is critical to find the correct outlet and share the warning with the appropriate population (Mayhorn, & McLaughlin, 2014). The goal of the message is to provide the intended population with enough detail to understand the physical characteristics of the hazard and how to plan accordingly to avoid harm (Mayhorn, & McLaughlin, 2014). Understanding both how these messages are created and distributed is critical.
Another way in which scholars recommend communicating to the public about disasters is by bringing in emotion (Thompson, 2013). Because of the importance of emotional impact that the losses other than loss of human life can have, people may be motivated to prepare for disasters when they are responsible for other living things such as pets (Thompson, 2013). Other literature explains how to prepare for natural disasters using methods like risk analysis, hazard mapping, integrated emergency planning, and acting once disaster has struck (Ritchie, 2004). This is less focused on how to tailor and send messages and more about how large organizations can prevent the most damage.
Following a natural disaster, there are different ways in which people can communicate to victims. Many people have a chance at life during these crises and need only to be found and rescued within a short amount of time (Jang, et al., n.d.). They also note that a lack of communication signals and methods following a disaster is one of the things that makes these rescues so difficult (Jang, et al., n.d.). The authors concludes this paper by presenting a design system that they believe will be more effective in communicating mobile rescues after an earthquake (Jang, et al., n.d.). It helps people to locate people when they are immobile and gives officials instructions on how to be more efficient in finding these people (Jang, et al., n.d.).
Much of the literature on communication before, during and after natural disasters pulls from previous cases. Some cases that are analyzed heavily include Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the Haitian earthquake in 2010. An article about the Wenchuan Earthquake brings up earlier issues of limited telecommunication during natural disasters and recommends that countries should set up specific technological countermeasures in order to issue emergency messages and also to handle high amounts of telephone traffic (Ran, 2011). This article is a case study of Hurricane Katrina, focusing on both the preparations and awareness beforehand, and the disaster response (Barnes, et al., 2008). By selecting four major newspaper publications, the authors are able to analyze how written warnings progressed leading up to the hurricane, and how disaster response evolved in the weeks following (Barnes, et al., 2008). They found that 78% of articles were focused on response and recovery, and only 8.9% put an emphasis on preparation. (Barnes, et al., 2008). This shows how the public can be more focused on natural disaster after they hit, suggesting a possible fault in public perception around these disasters.
Another article I examined focused on the 2010 earthquake in Haiti and how a response was communicated. The authors are particularly focused on new ways of communicating this knowledge by using social media technologies like wikis and collaborative workspaces. In the case of Haiti, the US embassy help communicate to send search and rescue teams from all over the world.
After researching how people react to disasters and how officials communicated to affected parties during these disasters, I made sure to look into scholarly literature on Chaos Theory. This theory is one way to explain what to do and how to manage a situation that is complex and unpredictable (Seeger, 2002). It is important to stick to some routine plan of action to stay calm and grounded; however, it is also important to develop some level of predictive understanding.
Theory
Chaos Theory, first developed in the natural sciences, attempts to explain the behavior of systems that are nonlinear and unpredictable (Murphy, 1996). This theory is one way to explain what to do and how to manage a situation that is complex and unpredictable. When looking at the whole picture, these systems that are complex and chaotic still find defined patterns and structures that can be tracked and predicted. It is important to stick to some routine plan of action to stay calm and grounded; however, it is also important to develop some level of predictive understanding. This also means that when an organization knows they are too complex to avoid disasters, they should have plans in place and prepare to be shocked and thrown off-course. Chaos Theory is outlined in major fundamental concepts including sensitive dependence on initial conditions, bifurcation, self-organization, fractals and strange attractors (Seeger, 2002). Chaos theory provides a particularly good model for crisis situations as it iterates through increasingly complex phases (Murphy, 1996). Natural Disasters like the Indonesian earthquake are easily defined as non-linear because the natural environment is inherently unpredictable, making it simple to apply Chaos Theory to the Indonesian earthquake in 2018.
The first key concept in Chaos Theory is sensitive dependence on initial conditions, sometimes referred to as the “butterfly effect” in pop culture (Seeger, 2002). The butterfly effect is the idea that something as small as a butterfly flapping its wings could lead to something catastrophic down the line. Initial conditions before a major crisis may be minor communication oversights that lead to something significant (Seeger, 2002). The principle of sensitive dependence of initial conditions also suggests that precise and accurate communication about the behavior of complex systems is inherently inaccurate (Seeger, 2002). This idea that minor changes can lead to large ones seems to suggest increased preparation, but it also suggests that chaotic situations are too hard to predict.
The next key concepts of Chaos Theory include bifurcation and self organization, or the radical disruption and then the natural reorganization of an organization's typical state. Organizational crises are points of system bifurcation or radical change where a system’s structure or direction is disrupted and departs from the previously designed path (Seeger, 2002). Even though all complex systems have the potential for bifurcation, Chaos Theory suggests that organizations that have higher levels of complexity and environmental interdependence are more likely to experience crisis events (Seeger, 2002). Although the existence of bifurcations can be predicted, the outcomes cannot be chosen (Murphy, 1996). These changes can also result in new, positive relationships as crises create opportunity for new order (Sellnow, 2002). The key to moving past these radical changes is to recognize this bifurcation stage for what it is and to react accordingly (Speakman, 2012).
Additional foundational concepts of Chaos Theory include self organization, fractals and attractors. Self organization is the natural process in which order re-emerges out of the chaotic state brought on through a change, or bifurcation (Seeger, 2002). Fractals are broadly defined as a feature of self-organization that are naturally occurring self-repeating patterns, structures and features (Seeger, 2002). These “fractals” measure the relative degree of complexity of something in a qualitative rather than quantitative manner, allowing for more accurate messages in some sense (Murphy, 1996). The theory also explains a mathematical term called “attractor” or a state in which a phenomenon will return to as it evolves, no matter how random a single moment may seem (Murphy, 1996). These attractors may be called “static” or “strange” based on how much they stray from the predictable path within a bounded range (Murphy, 1996). Media coverage after disasters shows how people grasp around for new attractors, giving different dramatic stories until the public decides on one (Murphy, 1996). Managers themselves can become “strange attractors” when they encourage communication and collaborative relationships to bring back order in an organization (Speakman, 2012). Identifying the attractors in a chaotic situation is vital because it shows what goal people are really concerned about and allows groups to communicate what is needed.
These components work together because they suggest that large organizations that are very complex and have lots of moving parts are susceptible to chaotic crisis events and should plan accordingly. These organizations should predict some unpredictability and know how to communicate clearly to prevent more chaotic crises. Although Chaos Theory seems to suggest that complex situations are easy to understand after the fact rather than predict them beforehand, it does give recommendations on working with public perception. For example, theory recommends looking beyond the immediate demands of an interest group and trying to figure out the strange attractor, or the thing that’s really causing the spread of rumors or causing the group to be upset (Murphy, 1996). Pulling all of these key concepts together, it is clear that Chaos Theory says that dysfunctional systems that experience apparent random changes are normal aspects of the system’s adaptation to this chaos. Because organizations will have crises inevitably, the theory argues that groups should build a culture that is more flexible and innovative (Speakman, 2012).
Chaos Theory has been applied to many famous crises including Hurricane Katrina, the 1997 Red River Valley flood in Minnesota, and NASA’s Challenger explosion. The study on the Red River Valley flood specifically evaluated the communication from emergency management teams and different levels of government and their predictions and how they communicated about risk (Sellnow, 2002). Sellnow (2002) found that the officials in this situation viewed a complex system in their outdated, traditional way and made decisions that lessened the effectiveness of the region’s planning and crisis communication. This situation shows how fractals, or qualitative measurements, may be more helpful in preparing for a crisis. It also shows how organizational hierarchies and norms before a crisis can change dramatically during the self-organization phase, as many relationships shifted after the flood (Sellnow, 2002). Chaos Theory is applied to NASA’s “Challenger” disaster in 1996 by Murphy in order to explain the transition from the company having a “perfect, fantasy” image to having an image of a company that could do things very wrong. The new attractor would turn here into “bad luck” or “incompetence”. This means that having a good and open public image is good in understanding chaotic events when they come about. The way a group reacts to a crisis depends on the dominant cultural beliefs or attitudes. A bad rumor may come about through the public and the media based on how tense the relation between the organization and other groups are. For example, even though organizations knew Katrina was coming and came up with disaster management strategies, the chaos of the event resulted still in dysfunctional and overwhelmed public organizations (Piotrowski, 2006).
Chaos Theory can easily be used to analyze the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake because it has been applied previously to similar disasters; also, natural disasters are inherently chaotic. One way in which Chaos Theory relates to my topic easily is that there are a number of things that could go wrong in a country that is unstable, huge and has a tendency for natural disasters. The government system of Indonesia is a huge, powerful group and large, complex organizations are more susceptible to crises. Organizations naturally adapt and self-organize after a disaster or series of unpredictable crisis events, and my paper analyzes how organizations communicate and work together amidst all of the chaos (Piotrowski, 2006). Chaos Theory may help explain additionally how strange attractors of public perceptions emerged to create more tension between the government and its public.
Chaos Theory also has many limitations when being applied to my paper topic. Because it underlines uncertainty and change, Chaos Theory is limited on how it recommends purposeful management of volatile issues (Murphy, 1996). Because it says chaos is unpredictable, it will be hard to apply to the initial part of my crisis because it cannot give solid recommendations for predicting a natural disaster other than that it cannot be entirely predicted. This theory may not be entirely helpful for my whole case because the case is so complex and Chaos Theory does not give many firm recommendations, only helps to explain the destruction and restoration of order. Chaos Theory is also usually applied to the natural sciences and the economics side of social science (Murphy, 1996). By understanding attractors and inevitable system bifurcation from Chaos Theory, I will evaluate how earthquake and tsunami information was communicated to the devastated public in Palu, Sulawesi.
Data and Method
To understand the general outline of events as well as the coverage and public opinion based on agenda setting, I went to major news sites and found reportings from the days surrounding the disasters. After adding these news releases to my timeline, I went to social media sites and sorted by the days before, during and after the disaster to see not only how organizations in charge communicated, but also how the public communicated to them and to their peers. I most notably searched through Twitter as that is the first place I would go for news and know that this is a popular news site for many others as well. I searched the phrase “indonesia earthquake” and the hashtag, #sulawesiearthquake. I went to Youtube to watch how video journalists portrayed the crisis on television news sources.
The tweets and social media response is also interesting because it is mostly from outside organizations and nonprofits like the Red Cross. It would have been nice to see more online action from the country's government. It is also important to consider cultural differences and how people get their news and information in different areas. People from other countries often posted that they were praying for victims or encouraged that others donate and help.
I also researched other natural disaster case studies as well as Indonesia’s dense history with natural disasters. The Sumatra earthquake in 2004 was one of the largest in recent history, and greatly illustrates how Indonesia should be understanding of how a devastating quake can shake a nation. Once I found a lot of information following the earthquake, I decided on some major topics that were covered in news articles, social media posts and in YouTube videos originally aired on television. These topics include problems with communicating with foreign governments for needed aid, broken or missing tsunami buoys and signals and the lack of communication form the local government to the community.
After building a basic timeline, I found many gaps in communication. Some of these gaps I had not previously seen. For example, I did not see the lack of response from local government like the mayor and vice mayor. This was definitely a huge communication gap because people look up to their local government for answers, help and direction. I also found while doing this research that this disaster is very complex and has multiple other crises within. For example, the Malaysian government blamed LGBT communities for the earthquake and there were problems with getting people through the airport (Brennan 2019). This made the research difficult because there is simply so much information. There is a lot of informative data here that helps me better understand how things worked but may not reflect how the public was feeling or exactly what the government was saying. The fact that government response is so hard to find, especially from the local government is concerning. There are also problems with the federal government's response. Although the president did visit the sites of the disaster to show support, he may have reacted in a way that make him seem weak to the public.
I originally thought the main communication error was the problem with the tsunami warning systems and found a lot of reaction and details surrounding that. Although natural disasters are unpredictable, the history of earthquakes and tsunamis in this area should have influenced the government to check and test their warning technologies. There may have been financial problems as some say the government had been spending less on these precautions in recent years. It is also important to consider how the journalists, especially TV journalists want to build up a dramatic story for a larger audience. Having a failed system is definitely a problem, but the issue of not getting the facts straight about what happened is also concerning.
Analysis
Introduction
On September 28th, 2018 a massive earthquake hit the area of Sulawesi in the mountains of Indonesia. The earthquake led to a large tsunami as well, ultimately resulting in over 2,000 deaths, making it the deadliest earthquake of the year (ASEAN Coordinating Centre, 2018). The lack of prodrome analysis, proper warning devices, organization in sending information and issues with damaged communication technology show how Indonesia coped with the disaster and ultimately failed to communicate effectively to every party. Through the lens of Chaos Theory, I will analyze this lack of warning about the tsunami.
Previous Natural Disasters in Indonesia
To understand the issues with Indonesia’s ability to issue a tsunami warning, it is important to comprehend the long history of natural disasters in the area. This case is focused on the chaotic and unpredictable Sulawesi/Palu earthquake and tsunami on September 28th, 2018. However, Indonesia is a country no stranger to large earthquakes and tsunamis. The area affected in Eastern Indonesia was an area known to be in great danger of large natural disasters. The convergence of Australia, Eurasia, the Pacific and the Philippine Sea plates lead to a highly risky and complex region of neotectonics (Watkinson, 2016). Indonesia is also home to over 130 volcanos, and many people live in volcanic danger zones (Zhou, 2018). The Ring of Fire is home to about 90% of the world’s earthquakes (Wei-Haas, 2018). Because Indonesia sits on this infamous “Ring of Fire” and is highly susceptible to earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions, one would think they would have studied previous crises in order to be more prepared. In 2004, a natural disaster in Indonesia killed over 167,000 people, becoming the third largest in earth’s history (Zhou, 2018). Indonesia should be expected to know about how to prepare for these disasters, no matter how unpredictable they may be. Chaos Theory suggests that precise and accurate communication about the behavior of complex systems is inherently inaccurate (Seeger, 2002). This is why hoping for clear, quantitative answers to a crisis will only lead to more frustration and confusion. Possibly more could have been analyzed beforehand in order to prepare the area for large amounts of destruction even if these conditions are hard to predict.
Because Indonesia faced many similar disasters, the group communicated to the public that the earthquake was coming. Chaos Theory suggests that organizations that have higher levels of complexity and environmental interdependence are more likely to experience crisis events (Seeger, 2002). Although Indonesia is a complex organization and natural disasters are complex as well, they still seemed unprepared for the changes to come. Because large organizations will have crises inevitably, the theory argues that groups should build a culture that is more flexible and innovative (Speakman, 2012). Having a flexible crisis plan from the start could have helped prevent Indonesia’s failure to send tsunami warning signals including sirens that are to alert the public.
Incompetent Disaster Preparation Systems
One reason that Indonesia had trouble communicating with the public about the tsunami is because of the lack of proper disaster-measuring systems. There are several ways in which communities prepare for tsunamis. The city of Palu, along with other disaster-prone cities in Indonesia, has set up tsunami warning devices, or beuys, to detect and then alert the public of possible dangers. Even though Indonesia is not a particularly wealthy nation, they have invested significant funds in beuys and other devices for earthquake and tsunami preparedness after their large earthquake in 2004 (Martin, 2019). However, the maintenance of these devices is expensive, and with the large amount of coastline that Indonesia has, they must keep up with many devices (Martin, 2019). Because the island of Sulawesi is in a place not historically known to have tsunamis, the government did not see investing in their maintenance as a priority (Wilkinson, 2018). Not only were governmental organizations not concerned about the lack of appropriate technology, but the public also had an interesting outlook.
Keeping up with these devices is a lot of work, and both lost and damaged beuys have often been reported. The country also has issues with people vandalizing and stealing these warning devices, showing there might also be an issue of public perception on their importance (Wilkinson, 2018). At the time of the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake and tsunami, Indonesia had zero working tsunami detection buoys and relied on less reliable systems including a network of seismic broadband systems and tidal gauges (Wei-Haas, 2018). An additional issue with the lack of proper detection technology is the fact that organizations in charge knew the problem existed. The spokesman for the country's national disaster agency (BNPB), Sutopo Purwo Nugroho, admitted that none of the 22 deep water seafloor buoys for tsunami warnings off Indonesia's coast had worked for the last six years (Wilkinson, 2018). The first key component of Chaos Theory, sensitive dependence on initial conditions, states that any condition before a major crisis could be minor communication oversights that lead to something significant (Seeger, 2002). In the case of the Sulawesi earthquake, the condition of having a limited amount of tsunami sensors is an initial condition. Not updating and investing in tsunami warning technology may not have seemed like a big deal before the crisis, but this proved to be catastrophic when the chaotic event actually occurred. Having more concrete sensors and warning systems in place could have saved lives, as it would have led to a more accurate warning. The idea that minor changes can lead to large ones seems to suggest increased preparation, but it also suggests that chaotic situations are too hard to predict.
Initial Tsunami Warnings
In addition to issues with investing in tsunami warning devices, there were communication problems with actually alerting the public that was to be hit with the wave. The Indonesian Agency for Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics, or the BMKG, is the organization in Indonesia responsible for measuring future disasters and issuing warnings and alerts (Wei-Haas, 2018). The issues this organization faced in communicating the tsunami warning include their method in communicating this information and their response to the backlash over the timing and severity of the warning message.
One major contributor to the gap in communication about the tsunami is due to problems with the actual communication technology. Because tsunami warnings are issued by sirens and text messages, it is important to consider whether the systems used to send and receive these messages will still work after a natural disaster (Wilkinson, 2018). Organizations alerting the public should also have an understanding of who will actually be able to hear the sirens and who may not have access to text alerts. Because the internet and telecommunications were down in affected areas, the timing of the signals is also unclear. This uncertainty surrounding the timing of the warning messages is one reason for the backlash against the BMKG. The issue of lost cell service and telecommunication during natural disasters is something that often happens and allows for many more issues. This is just one example of bifurcation following the first chaotic event (Seeger, 2002).
Natural Disasters are inherently unpredictable and complex, meaning the groups involved in analyzing these geological warnings should have been prepared for possible radical changes. In Chaos Theory, points of system bifurcation are these “radical changes” that occur (Seeger, 2002). A system that is complex in nature should be prepared to have their structure or direction disrupted and departed from the previously designed path (Seeger, 2002). One example of a bifurcation was the unexpected tsunami following the earthquake. Although it is not atypical for tsunamis to follow earthquakes, this type of earthquake, coming from a strike-slip fault, does not typically result in large waves (Petersen, 2018). Not only was the tsunami itself unexpected, but it also caught geologists by surprise and achieved a larger height than anticipated (Wei-Haas, 2018). These unexpected changes following the earthquake show how bifurcations can occur following a large disaster. The size of the crisis and of the organizations involved make the event more susceptible to these changes as many initial conditions exist that could possibly affect the normalcy of the situation. In addition to explaining sensitive initial conditions and bifurcations during the Sulawesi tsunami, Chaos Theory can also explain the focus of the public involved.
V. Backlash Against the BMKG
The BMKG faced a major communication issue when they supposedly sent out a tsunami warning and then took it back. Because of the lack of internet and telecommunication, it is hard to figure out the exact time that the warning was issued and when it was taken back (Wilkinson, 2018). The BMKG first claimed the waves detected by their systems were not large enough to substantiate a warning, and they could not contact the people in Palu because the phone lines were down (Wei-Haas, 2018). The alert, warning waves up to 3 meters, was sounded after 6 p.m. and was canceled at 6.36 p.m (Wilkinson, 2018). There were allegations from the public about not getting the message on time; however, the group said the alert was lifted after the tsunami hit land (Wilkinson, 2018). With a more timely warning, victims of the tsunami could have had more time to evacuate or seek higher ground. It would have also been critical for the organization to communicate best practices during a tsunami as people possibly did not know the correct safety procedures.
Regardless of whether or not the BMKG sent out and left the message at the right time, they were still criticized heavily by the public in Indonesia and around the world. This is an example of a “strange attractor”, or the thing that’s really causing the spread of rumors or causing the group to be upset (Murphy, 1996). Chaos Theory recommends looking beyond the immediate demands of an interest group and trying to figure out the strange attractor (Murphy, 1996). It is possible that the BMKG really did not have the resources to measure the accuracy of the tsunami’s future impact and communicate that to those to be affected. Leaders of an organization can become “strange attractors” also when they encourage communication and collaborative relationships to bring back order in an organization (Speakman, 2012). It may have helped if the BMKG was able to effectively communicate to the public directly after their mishap in order to shift their reputation. Instead, the group had multiple spokespeople who used denial as a strategy to move blame away from the organization.
After a series of bifurcations or radical changes because of a complex disaster, an organization can achieve a state of “normalcy”, known in Chaos Theory as “Self-Organization” (Seeger, 2002). The Indonesian government was not clearly organized in their pre-crisis planning, but could have communicated better during and after in order to speed up their path to normalcy.
Conclusion
Overall, viewing the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake through the lens of Chaos Theory is beneficial in understanding how the crisis evolved. Chaos Theory generally suggests that radical changes are natural, and Indonesia is still experiencing bifurcations as they attempt to recover the area struck by disaster. It may still be long time until the area affected by the earthquake and tsunami emerges with a fresh sense of order. Not only should the country invest more in these systems, but they should also put a higher priority on warning the public about how to react to disaster situations. This analysis also allows for possible suggestions, especially in shaping public perception. In the next section, I will address this issue of dangerous public perceptions of natural disasters in Palu and how the government and other organizations could have shaped this culture. It is important to consider these issues even after the fact as Indonesia will likely face a similar disaster in the near future.
Crisis Communication Plan
The communication gap of people not being warned adequately of the tsunami warrants a communication plan focused on interaction between national organizations and messages to shape public perception. Through my analysis using Chaos Theory, I found that Indonesia coped with the disaster and ultimately failed to communicate effectively to every party. This was because of the lack of prodrome analysis, proper warning devices, and organization in sending information and issues with damaged communication technology. One major objective in using this plan is shaping public perception on the danger of similar crises. I will address this issue of dangerous public perceptions of natural disasters in Palu and how the government and other organizations could have shaped this culture. It is important to consider these issues even after the fact as Indonesia will likely face a similar disaster in the near future. In this section you will find four main sections outlining the key publics to be addressed, key messages for these publics, how these messages will be distributed including media exposure and how the public perception around natural disasters can be shaped.
Purpose of the Plan:
Some other purposes and objectives for this plan include making sure that all communications are accurate to the knowledge of those in leadership. The plan should also maintain a clear and honest relationship with the public. The following plan outlines the strategy and desired implementation of acts of service during the coming Sulawesi natural disaster. Please follow the terms and instructions to ensure as much order as possible. This plan should be activated as soon as a disaster with high capabilities is detected by meteorologists. The communication between the meteorologists and the government of Indonesia should be quick and efficient.
Section A: Key Publics and Notifying Key Publics
The most important public to communicate to before, during and after the earthquake is the group likely to be physically affected by the natural disaster. In the case of this disaster, this includes the public in the city of Palu, which consists of about 335,000 people (Henschke, 2018). Palu is the largest city in Central Sulawesi and also the city most directly in the path of the earthquake and tsunami that followed. It will also be important to identify neighboring islands and countries as they are also affected both environmentally and financially. Other key public groups include the non-profit organizations in and around the area affected, community leaders, and larger public figures. For example, the Indonesian Red Cross Society and Longki Djanggola, the governor of central Sulawesi should be kept in mind. The appendix holds a more complete list of key publics that will be communicated to, mostly consisting of non-profit organizations and community leaders as previously mentioned.
When notifying these key publics, key messages should be presented including information on safety before an earthquake, during the earthquake, after the earthquake and preparing for possible tsunamis. Below are general messages to be sent out before, during and after the earthquake. The Appendix features additional and specific media message examples.
Section B: Key Messages
Before the earthquake, it is important to send many messages as this is when lives can easily be saved and perception around the earthquake’s danger can perhaps be changed. People should look ahead of time for areas in their home, school or work that could act as shelters in the event of an emergency. They should also be told to stay away from large items that could fall during an earthquake and fasten them or move them if needed. For example, bookshelves and refrigerators should be tied down to promote safety and protect personal property. There should also be instructions available of when, how and where to evacuate to avoid the path of the disaster. There should also be information on specifically what areas will be hit so people know if evacuation is even necessary.
During the disaster, immediate clear messages will be sent out in order to inform the public that the disaster is now occurring. This includes loud sirens around the town, breaking news on television and radio and text message alerts. Messages to be sent out during the disaster include information about what to do and where to go. For example, if people are unable to evacuate for whatever reason, they should be informed of where large shelters and emergency personnel are located.
After the disaster, one major message to be pushed out post natural disaster is about locating family and friends. People should be encouraged to mark themselves as “safe” on social media sites on Facebook. There should also be a database dedicated to identifying separated families and filing for missing loved ones. This can also be used for animals as well.
Another set of messages after the disaster should be focused on how others can help the devastated community. For example, larger organizations should redirect people to nonprofits onsite like the Indonesia Red Cross. These organizations will have clear instructions on how to easily donate money towards the cause or how to get more directly involved. People who need help should also have the opportunity to communicate to organizations that offer resources. Information on nonprofit and large websites related to the disaster should post how to ask for help and what they can expect to receive.
Section C: Communicating with the Media
The media plays a large role in agenda setting and deciding what the public think about a disaster at all points of its life cycle. Below are some major media spokespeople and also ways in which key messages will be transferred to the key publics mentioned above. The appendix includes a media list.
Key spokespeople will include Willem Rampangilei, Joko Widodo and the BMKG. Willem Rampangilei, head of the National Board for Disaster Management (BNPB), would be a good primary spokesperson for this disaster as he is experienced in responding publically and speaking about natural disasters in the past. Joko Widodo has been the president of Indonesia since 2014. Joko Widodo will not be the primary spokesperson, but as the president of Indonesia, he still will play a role in shaping public perception of this disaster and in natural disasters in general. The Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysical Agency (BMKG) is the organization responsible for analyzing environmental factors that could lead to natural disasters.
Other channels for message transfers include websites and online resources, television and news channels and social media. A website will be created so that people can have a central location to go to and find information. This page will linked on the government's website and social media pages so it will be found. This should be an extension page on the BNPB’s page that posts constantly right before, during and after the disaster. This could be either in the form of blogs or something that looks like news articles. Information will be transferred to key publics through television and news channels. The BNPB and BMKG should communicate with the press and release statements with concise, clear and accurate information. They should also refer viewers to where they can get additional resources. All major forms of social media should be used as people prefer to receive information from varying sources. Twitter will be one of the most important and it should be clear which Twitter account is sending out the most relevant, new disaster information. Nonprofits should separately inform people how they can help and what they are doing onsite. A minimal number of official hashtags should be used, and when applicable, videos and multimedia is more engaging for audiences and should be posted.
Section D: Shaping Public Perception Around Natural Disasters
In order to shape public perception around natural disasters, there should be an increase in disaster risk education for children and disaster and hazard awareness campaigns. These education programs should be focused on facts and statistics in order to highlight the vulnerability Indonesia faces in terms of danger. There should be a concentration also on actual steps to take in case of a coming disaster like how to evacuate and how to get or give aid. Hazard awareness campaigns should be created in order to remind people of dangers. Examples of social media posts related to this campaign can be found in the appendix. This campaign will be geared around anniversaries of previous disasters or national disaster recognition holidays and should work with influential celebrities in order to encourage all kinds of people to participate.
Conclusion
The earthquake and tsunami in central Sulawesi, Indonesia during September of 2018 was catastrophic. After analyzing previous research in natural disaster and crisis communication, I better understood the many complexities of this type of crisis. These complications can be explained through Chaos Theory, which explains how complex events trigger chaos. For example, it is difficult to communicate by text or through the internet when nature interrupts these forms for communication. This makes it more important to consider preparation communication before the disaster and increasing education for individuals in susceptible areas. There is not much research on shaping public perception and education levels surrounding natural disasters. This paper is limited because I do not have extensive knowledge about organizations in Indonesia or the culture of Southeast Asia. Communication before, during and after natural disasters is also hard to study and report concisely because of the sheer number of large groups involved. Changing the way people understand the dangers of earthquakes and tsunamis takes more than just changing the mission of one governmental group or nonprofit, it is about changing both their messages and changing the way people receive them.
References
Acar, A., & Muraki, Y. (2011). Twitter for crisis communication: lessons learned from Japan's tsunami disaster. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 7(3), 392-402.
ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on disaster management. (2018). "Situation Update No. 12 M 7.4 Earthquake & Tsunami Sulawesi, Indonesia". AHA Centre.
Barnes, M. D., Hanson, C. L., Novilla, L. M., Meacham, A. T., McIntyre, E., & Erickson, B. C. (2008). Analysis of media agenda setting during and after Hurricane Katrina: Implications for emergency preparedness, disaster response, and disaster policy. American journal of public health, 98(4), 604-610.
Brennan, David. “Malaysia Has No Gay People, Country's Tourism Minister Claims at Travel Fair.” Newsweek, 6 Mar. 2019, www.newsweek.com/malaysia-gay-people-lgbt-tourism-travel-jews-mohamaddin-ketapi-1353684.
Henschke, Rebecca. “Indonesia Tsunami: Aftershocks Rock Palu Day after Disaster.” BBC News, BBC, 30 Sept. 2018, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45693281.
Jang, H., Lien, Y., & Tsai, T. (n.d.). Rescue information system for earthquake disasters based on MANET emergency communication platform. Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing: Connecting the World Wirelessly, 623.
Martin, Kelly. (2019). How The December 2018 Tsunami In Indonesia Took Everyone By Surprise Despite Today's Technology. Forbes.
Mayhorn, C., & McLaughlin, A. (2014). Warning the world of extreme events: A global perspective on risk communication for natural and technological disaster. Safety Science, 61, 43-50.
Murphy, P. (1996). Chaos theory as a model for managing issues and crises. Public Relations Review., 22(2), 95-113.
Paton, D., & Johnston, D. (2001). Disasters and communities: Vulnerability, resilience and preparedness. Disaster Prevention and Management., 10(4), 270-277.
Petersen, Hannah-Ellis. (2018). What caused the Indonesian tsunami and could lives have been saved? The Guardian.
Piotrowski, C. (2006). Hurricane Katrina and organization development: Part 1. Implications of chaos theory. Organization Development Journal., 24(3), 10.
Ran, Y. (2011). Considerations and suggestions on improvement of communication network disaster countermeasures after the wenchuan earthquake. IEEE Communications Magazine., 49(1), 44-47.
Ritchie, B. (2004). Chaos, crises and disasters: A strategic approach to crisis management in the tourism industry. Tourism Management., 25(6), 669-683.
Salna, Karlis; Rusmana, Yoga; Rahadiana, Rieka. (2018). Deadly Indonesia Quake, Tsunami Deliver Fresh Economic Risk. Bloomberg.
Seeger, M. (2002). Chaos and crisis: Propositions for a general theory of crisis communication. Public Relations Review., 28(4), 329-337.
Sellnow, T., Seeger, M., & Ulmer, R. (2002). Chaos theory, informational needs, and natural disasters. Journal of Applied Communication Research JACR., 30(4), 269-292.
Speakman, M., & Sharpley, R. (2012). A chaos theory perspective on destination crisis management: Evidence from Mexico. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management., 1(1-2), 67-77.
Thompson, K. (2013). Save me, save my dog: Increasing natural disaster preparedness and survival by addressing human-animal relationships. Australian Journal of Communication, 40(1), 123.
Watkinson I.M.; Hall R. (2016). "Fault systems of the eastern Indonesian triple junction: evaluation of Quaternary activity and implications for seismic hazards". In Cummins P.R.; Meilano I. Geohazards in Indonesia: Earth Science for Disaster Risk Reduction. Geological Society of London, Special Publications. pp. 71–120.
Wei-Hass, Maya. (2018). "Indonesia's Surprise Tsunami, Explained". National Geographic.
Wilkinson, Bard. (2018). Indonesia accused of mishandling tsunami warnings. CNN
Yates, D., & Paquette, S. (2010, October). Emergency knowledge management and social media technologies: A case study of the 2010 Haitian earthquake. In Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem-Volume 47 (p. 42). American Society for Information Science.
Zhou, Youyou. (2018). Indonesia’s biggest earthquakes and tsunamis since 2004. Quartz.
