Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Supriyati D. Andreastuti; Eko T. Paripurno; Subandriyo Subandriyo; Devy K. Syahbana; Ardhy S. Prayoga

doi:10.1186/s13617-023-00129-2

Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Andreastuti, Supriyati D.; Paripurno, Eko T.; Subandriyo, Subandriyo; Syahbana, Devy K.; Prayoga, Ardhy S. 2023-05-20 00:00:00 Volcano disaster risk management during a crisis requires continuous and intensive risk communication with the public. However, to have the desired public response during a crisis, it is necessary to improve the community’s understanding of volcanoes. Knowledge, experience, risk perception, communication, and drills shape good commu- nity responses. These require a bottom-up process of communication and involvement of the community in decision- making and engagement with the government. Thus, proper crisis management requires top-down and bottom-up communication and joint work between the scientists, decision-makers, and the community. The response from the community can be improved through community-based preparedness with a culturally sensitive approach that facilitates a strong relationship and participation of community members according to their customs. The Wajib Latih Penanggulangan Bencana ( WLPB: Compulsory Disaster Management Training Program) and the SISTER VILLAGE Pro- gram in the Merapi Volcano community are good examples of community-based preparation in Indonesia. An effective volcano early warning protocol includes risks analysis, volcano monitoring, hazards analysis and fore - casting, dissemination of alerts and warnings, and community response according to the warning. Alert levels can also be increased during the unrest, so actions are also associated with this and not just related to the impacts of an eruption. Therefore, the alert level alone is not helpful if it is not appropriately communicated with an action plan in place to improve community awareness. Moreover, personal communication between scientists and decision-makers and between scientists and the community is essential to instill self-responsibility and a sense of belonging. Personal communication describes the trust of community members or certain decision-makers to scientists to obtain more detailed explanations of volcanic activity. Such communication is already occurring in communities that have experi- enced a long history of eruptions, and/or continuous eruptions, such as at Merapi and Sinabung volcanoes. The disaster management system in Indonesia includes institutions that manage science and institutions responsible for social aspects, such as evacuations, refugee handling, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA, Badan Nasional Bencana, BNPB in Bahasa Indonesia) of Indonesia coordinates all disas- ters to integrate management of and facilitate communication between stakeholders. In addition to a well-established system, effective and good disaster management needs to be supported by poli- cies related to public needs before, during, and after the disaster. After disasters, a review of previous strategies is also necessary to develop a better strategy and obtain a better result. Establishing SISTER VILLAGES is an excellent strategy *Correspondence: Supriyati D. Andreastuti s7andreastuti@gmail.com Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ publi cdoma in/ zero/1. 0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 2 of 20 to meet the needs during a crisis. However, this needs to be supported by regulations related to collecting data, the evacuation process and facilitation, and infrastructure, communication, and coordination. Here, we present good risk communication practices around Indonesia’s volcanoes related to how people receive and understand early warning information and take action with the support of the government through capacity improvement and learning from experiences. Keywords Volcano, Disaster management, Early warning, WLPB, SISTER VILLAGE, Communication, Coordination, Crisis, Community response, Policy, Strategy review Introduction landslide is the mandate of Ministry of Energy and Min- Volcano disaster risk management is the implementa- eral Resources, through the Centre for Volcanology and tion of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies to Geological Hazard Mitigation (CVGHM), earthquake prevent the disaster risk associated with volcanic activity and tsunami is the mandate of the Meteorological, Cli- (UNISDR). In Indonesia, there are 127 active volcanoes, matological, and Geophysical Agency, (Badan Meteor- of which 77 are classified as Type A, 29 as Type B, and 21 ologi, Klimatologi dan Geofisika BMKG) and others. In as Type C. Type A volcanoes are those classified as very this paper, we discuss the mitigation of volcanic hazard active and have a high probability to erupt (Andreastuti in Indonesia. Here, we present good examples of best et al. 2018). This classification is used to decide the prior - practices of communication between scientists, decision ity level of volcano monitoring. makers and the public through the WLPB and SISTER Volcano disaster risk management during a crisis VILLAGE initiatives at Merapi, Agung and Sinabung. involves a wide range of stakeholders from various sec- tors, including National, Provincial and Local Disaster The importance of capacity building Management Agencies, the Indonesian Army and Police, of communities within hazard zones of volcanoes Transportation, Social, Public Work, and Health Minis- Indonesia, with its large number of volcanoes and a tries. Adequate disaster prevention effort, and disaster high density population living on their slopes, requires management actions during and post disaster need effec - efforts to increase the capacity of communities to deal tive communication channels and understandable infor- with future eruptions. Volcanoes are monitored continu- mation. The manner in which this happens varies a lot ously, however the risks caused by volcano hazards are according to the country, cultures and past experience very dynamic. This is influenced by the development of of volcanic activity (e.g. Martinez-Villegas et al. 2021; residential areas and facilities around active volcanoes, Becker et al. 2018). In Indonesia, in addition to a central which tend to grow near the source of hazards. Efforts and local government and stakeholders, this process also are being made to reduce the risk of volcanic eruptions, involves the local communities. According to law, Disas- through, among other initiatives, strengthening capac- ter Management includes policies for the development of ity of communities so that they are able to respond at disaster risk areas, disaster prevention activities, emer- the time of eruption. This research aims to understand gency response, and rehabilitation. factors involved in risk communication, and the best The implementation of disaster mitigation activi - practices learned during the crisis and how these affect ties is coordinated by the National Disaster Manage- disaster risk management processes. Based on experi- ment Agency (NDMA) (BNPB in Bahasa Indonesia). In ences of previous eruption in several locations of past the event of disaster, the management is coordinated disasters, we improved risk communication within com- by BNPB or Provincial Disaster Management Agency munities through a cultural-based, egalitarian, empa- (PDMA)/Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah thetic approach. To identify problems in communication (BPBD) Provinsi or Regional Disaster Management we also used method of meeting, briefings, workshops, Agency (RDMA)/ Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Dae- and direct interviews with key persons from scientific rah (BPBD) Kabupaten/Kota according to the scale of institutions, disaster management agencies, and local disaster. Determination of Disaster Emergency Status for governments. The result led to the proposal of a social the national level is set by the President, and at provincial system created by the community through Wajib Latih level by the Governor, or Major/Regent in accordance Penanggulangan Bencana (WLPB) and SISTER VIL- with the level of disaster (Presidential Decree Number LAGE and supported by decision-makers. The outcomes 17 Year 2018). Mitigation of each individual hazard is also include an understanding of volcanic hazards and given to Ministry or Agency, i.e. flooding is the mandate of Ministry of Public Works and Housing, volcano and A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 3 of 20 communication and coordination as discussed in the fol- and the public. Besides volcano information, MAGMA lowing sections. Indonesia also provides information related to the miti- gation of landslides, earthquakes, and tsunamis. Informa- Volcano disaster prevention activities tion disseminated through MAGMA Indonesia consists Disaster prevention aims to reduce vulnerability and of scientific information (Volcano Activity Report/VAR, exposure (United Nation Disaster Risk Reduction Volcano Eruption Notice/VEN, Volcano Observation (UNDRR) 2016), and can be carried out for example Notice for Aviation/VONA, Volcano Activity Evaluation through physical mitigation measures or regulation. for volcano above Normal Level), and information for the Disaster prevention activities carried out by CVGHM general public (press releases, educational information, include programs such as volcano monitoring and hazard interactive communications, etc.). assessment, preparation and socializing of volcanic haz- ard maps, dissemination of information including alert Monitoring data collection, processing and information levels through the MAGMA (Multiplatform Application Volcano monitoring data retrieved from the observa- for Geohazard Mitigation and Assessment) Indonesia tories are reported routinely to CVGHM. The report application and website (https:// magma. esdm. go. id), includes the visual and instrumental data the volcanolo- preparation and maintenance of early warning systems, gists will analyze further. The workflow included in the and education. The monitoring activities are carried out process (Fig. 1) involves scientific information about at 69 type-A volcanoes through 74 volcano observatories. the volcano and eruption. This information is evaluated Seventy-one volcanic hazard maps have been distributed and complemented by the geological record and previ- as hard copies to stakeholders and the public. Hazard ous eruptions, hazard maps, hazard modeling, and event maps are also accessible online via the MAGMA Indo- tree analysis. The resulting information is processed nesia application and website. According to the law, a and communicated to stakeholders and public through hazard map is suggested as the basis for spatial planning. the Volcano Alert Level and its recommendation of the Of 77 type A volcanoes, four volcanoes are submarine, potentially affected areas (see Table 1 below for more and the rest are remote volcanoes, those are difficult to details). During a crisis, the hazards map, hazards infor- access. mation, exposure of the potentially affected areas, and Dissemination of volcano information is carried out risk information are communicated to and followed up by through MAGMA Indonesia (https:// magma. vsi. esdm. the BNPB and BPBD. In case of an indication of increas- go. id/ index. php n.d.), which is an application of geo- ing activity, the local BPBD will be contacted directly by a logical disaster information in real-time to stakeholders volcano observer from the respective volcano. Fig. 1 Components of Hazard Assessment during a volcanic crisis. The output of hazard assessment is an alert level and technical recommendation (right). The alert level and recommendation are then applied to threatened community (left) Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 4 of 20 Table 1 Volcano alert level as developed in Indonesia and the linked community response (modified from Andreastuti et al. 2019) Level of Volcanic Activity Indication Community Response Frequency of report Normal Level (I) Visual observations and instrumental records show normal fluctuations Communities in Hazard Zones (HZs) I and II may carry out daily activities. Monthly and no change of activity. Hazards in the form of poisonous gas may be Communities in HZ III may carry out daily activity as long as they are present near vents, depending on the volcano’s characteristic activity in compliance with regulatory requirements from local government according to the technical recommendation of the Geological Agency, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Waspada Level (II, Advisory) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I and II may carry out their normal activities, but Biweekly indications of increasing volcanic activity must keep alert. For communities in HZ III it is recommended that they do not carry out daily activities in areas near summit craters or other vents Siaga Level (III, Watch) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I should improve their awareness and must not Daily prominent indications of increasing volcanic activity. Eruptions may take carry out activities along river valleys that originate at or near the place, but do not threaten settlements and/or activities of communities volcano’s summit near the volcano Communities in HZ II should start to prepare for evacuation and await an evacuation order from the local government according to the techni- cal recommendation of the Geological Agency, Ministry Energy and Mineral Resources. Community in HZ III are not permitted to carry out daily activities and should prepare to evacuate Awas Level (IV, Warning) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I, II, and III are to immediately to evacuate by the Every 6 h significant indications of ongoing volcanic activity, with eruptions order of local government, according to technical that potentially threaten settlements and or communities around the recommendation from Geological Agency, Ministry Energy and Mineral volcano Resources A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 5 of 20 Indonesia volcano alert level This communication is followed by activities of warning Based on Andreastuti et al. (2018), a volcano alert level to the relevant stakeholders and communities, intensive is the level of the hazard potential of volcanic activity at communication with the community at risk, review of a a particular time. Indonesia uses a scale with four alert contingency plan, community exercise and evacuation levels, from the lowest to the highest: Normal (Level I), drill. During a crisis, the community with their capacity Waspada (Advisory; Level II), Siaga (Watch, Level III), is challenged to take proper response or action according and Awas (Warning, Level IV). The volcano alert levels to hazard information and level of activity, because their are applicable for all monitored volcanoes. In Indonesia, action depends on several factors such as psychological the alert levels have been implemented since 1996 (Direk- condition, leadership and preparedness culture which is torat Vulkanologi, 1996). The volcano alert levels and built during evacuation drills. their recommendations are sent to stakeholders, such as NDMA (BNPB), PDMA (BPBD Provinsi), and RDMA An integrated disaster risk management system (BPBD Kabupaten/Kota), where the potential volcanic in Indonesia hazards are located. Alert levels are also disseminated An integrated Disaster Risk Management System is a to the public through the MAGMA Indonesia applica- series of activities related to disaster risk mitigation tion and website. The report dissemination frequency is involving a multi-stakeholder (PentaHelix), multi-disci- monthly, biweekly, daily, and every 6 h, depending on the plinary approach, across different levels of government, alert levels. The higher the volcano alert level, the higher global, regional, national, local, and individual efforts. the reporting frequency. The implementation of volcano These activities are in accordance with the four priori - alert levels as part of an early warning system in Indone- ties of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduc- sia describes the potential impact of volcanic behavior on tion (SFDRR) 2015–2030 n.d., namely (i) Understanding nearby communities, as shown by exclusion zones. This disaster risk; (ii) Strengthening disaster risk governance is also supported by community capacity as communi- to manage disaster risk; (iii) Investing in disaster reduc- ties are involved in the implementation of actions dur- tion for resilience and; (iv) Enhancing disaster prepared- ing volcanic crises and eruptions according to alert level ness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in (Andreastuti et al. 2018). recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The Merapi volcano community has implemented a WLPB is a program implemented in Merapi since 2016, community-based early warning system through Wajib initiated by the Merapi Forum. It is a multi-stakeholder Latih Penanggulangan Bencana (Compulsory Disas- forum across four regencies in Central Java (Magelang, ter Management Training Program, WLPB) (Rahman, Boyolali, and Klaten Regencies) and Yogyakarta (Sleman et al. 2016). This program has been implemented for Regency) Provinces for handling the Mount Merapi risk. people living in HZ III around Merapi during Nor- The forum was established in 2007. The activities repre - mal (Level I), since 2016. The main core of WLPB is to sent the four priorities of SFDRR and aim to encourage strengthen community capacity through knowledge collaboration between residents on the slopes of Merapi improvement and community skills to be able to iden- and stakeholders such as the government (including tify safe places, carry out rescues, and be independent CVGHM), media, private sector, and donor agencies. The (Indonesia National Standard no 8039 2018). The sys - forum’s goal is both to reduce the risk associated with an tem was also implemented in the Kelud (Paripurno and eruption at Merapi Volcano and to manage its natural Nugroho 2018) and Agung communities (https:// mmb. resources. The WLPB aims to improve knowledge and upn yk . ac . id/ b er it a/ p enin g k a t an- k a p a s it a s - ma s y a rak a t- community skill in disaster risk management and is part gunung- agung n.d.). It includes four key elements: 1) risk of Community-based Disaster Risk Management. The knowledge, 2) monitoring as well as hazard assessment substance of the WLPB program includes (1) basic dis- and forecasting of the hazards, 3) communication or dis- aster management, (2) hazard character assessment, (3) semination of alerts and warnings, and 4) community risk assessment, (4) inclusive early warning, and (5) evac- response, as mentioned in United Nations International uation planning. WLPB has been implemented at volca- Strategy for Disaster Reduction, UNISDR (2009). There - noes such as Merapi, Kelut, Bromo, Semeru (Adi et al. in fore, alert level information is only useful if it is under- Paripurno ed. 2015) and Agung. stood by the community and stakeholders. Another form of Community-based Disaster Risk Communicating scientific information and advice to Management is the SISTER VILLAGE program, which decision makers should include several requirements has started to be implemented at several volcanoes in such as clear, acceptable and understandable informa- Indonesia, such as Merapi, Kelud, Agung, and Sinabung. tion with a description and type of hazard potential, as SISTER VILLAGE is a program in which a village located well as the possible magnitude and likely area affected. in a High Hazard Zone (Hazard Zone III) is paired with Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 6 of 20 a safe village outside the hazard zone for the emergency capacity (UNDRR 2016) of people in their normal lives. plan (Mei 2013), including an evacuation place (Astri- Based on Erfurt-Cooper (2018), vulnerability can be a ani 2017). According to the BPBD of Magelang Regency result of people being unaware or ignoring the potential (2016) in Elysia and Widahanto (2018), the creation risk while visiting an unsafe place. An extreme example of a SISTER VILLAGE considers the close relation- was the eruption of Sinabung Volcano, Indonesia on 1 ship between the two villages, the readiness of the part- February 2014. The eruption occurred at 10:30 am local ner village, accessibility, potential for development and time, produced pyroclastic flows which extended up to sustainability, and security. This concept prioritizes com - 4.5 km. Sixteen people from outside the areas entered the munication and coordination to meet needs and sustain- exclusion zone up to 3 km from the summit in the south able development in the face of future volcanic eruptions. flank at Sukameriah Village and all of them died because The rapid growth and expansion of population in a of pyroclastic flows. By that time, it was prohibited to country with a high number of volcanoes such as Indo- enter exclusion zone up to 5 km radius from the summit nesia can have an effect on livelihood and social hard - to the south (Andreastuti et al. 2019). ship and even political complexity. According to Gaillard In terms of the two views mentioned above (Gail- (2008), there are two views on how people respond to lard 2008), even though the Sinabung eruption was not volcanic hazards. One considers mainly the volcanic extreme, it highlights two examples of cultural degrada- phenomena and associated risk, and the other takes into tion and political intervention through social media dur- account the economic, social and political aspects. Bridg- ing a crisis. ing between the two views is even more complicated in The first example relates to the involvement of vol - disaster management, although cooperation between the unteers to help prepare meals for evacuees during the various stakeholders can address the problem and facili- Sinabung crisis, which disturbed the local customs tate better communication. The NDMA (BNPB) is the because the local people could no longer participate coordinator for disaster management in Indonesia and (Andreastuti et al. 2019). In the evacuation place, when can handle and facilitate the communication between a community stays in a jamhur (local building for people stakeholders, as it is the recognized agency in disaster gathering) of another village, the host village will prepare management (see Fig. 2). a meal for several days. After that, the evacuees will take Disaster is a complex mix of natural hazards and turns filling their needs. However, the involvement of human action (Wisner et al. 2014, UNDRR, 2016); there- people from outside disrupted this custom, affecting the fore, disasters are a consequence of hazardous events character of the evacuation place. interacting with conditions of exposure, vulnerability and Fig. 2 Disaster Management structure in Indonesia and the implementation agency (Presidential Decree Number 8 Year 2008). BNPB in the left panel, and the implementing agencies at national level (right panel) A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 7 of 20 The second example relates to the refusal of SBY CVGHM is under the Ministry of Energy and Mineral (Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the Indonesia President, Resources, Geological Agency, with the mandate to pro- 2004–2014) to declare Sinabung as a national disaster, vide technical recommendations and volcano early warn- provoking public outrage against his social media pres- ing to BNPB and BPBD. Therefore, alert level information ence (#unfollowSBY). This was an indicator of declining and recommendation are sent to BNPB and BPBD regu- external political efficacy based on government responses larly according to the location of volcanoes. (Parent et al. 2005, in Chatfield and Reddick 2015). The The system of decision making in Indonesia’s volcano decision meant that that the local government could not disaster mitigation has a clear separation between insti- receive the aid of the central government for the affected tutions that have a mandate to handle mitigation in the villagers. Even though, according to the impact of the field of science (CVGHM), and the institution that is Sinabung eruption, it was classified as a local disaster, responsible for the social aspects of the disaster i.e., evac- in other words did not meet the requirements to receive uating the population (BNPB, Coordinated Ministry of assistance from the central government (Presidential Human Development and Culture, Ministry of Finance, Decree Number 17 Year 2018). Ministry of Transportation, Indonesian Army and Indo- The dense population combined with the needs for nesian Police), facilitating refugees (BNPB, Coordinated livelihoods force people living in the vicinity of a volcano Ministry of Human Development and Culture, Ministry to move closer to the source of the hazard. Therefore, the of Social Affairs, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Finance), risk increases due to higher exposure. To reduce volcanic conducting rehabilitation and reconstruction (BNPB, disaster risk, it requires not only to understand the vol- Coordinated Ministry of Human Development and Cul- cano and its processes, but also to prepare the commu- ture, Ministry of Public Work and Housing, Ministry of nity in anticipation of the event. Home Affairs, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, The structure of disaster management in Indonesia Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning, Indonesian Army contains a disaster committee and implementing agencies and Indonesian Police) (Table 2). Each level of disaster (Fig. 2). The committee consists of 9 people from the pro - management agency is supported by implementing agen- fessional community who are appointed by the respective cies according to the level. For its activities, BNPB is sup- Local Government based on the proposal of BPBD. The ported by 11 institutions at the ministry level, including implementing agency covers ten ministries and agencies. the Coordinated Ministry of Human Development and Table 2 Summary of decision-making agency/ministry in handling volcano disaster mitigation in Indonesia Agency/Ministry Science Information Social Evacuation Facilitating Rehabilitation refugees and reconstruction National Disaster Management Agency v v v Coordinated Ministry of Human Develop- v v v ment and Culture Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources v v ( Through the Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation) Ministry of Finance v v v Ministry of Transportation v Ministry of Information and Informatics v Ministry of Social Affairs v Ministry of Education v Ministry of Health v Ministry of Public Work and Housing v National Search and Rescue Agency v Indonesian Red Cross v v Ministry of Home Affairs, v v Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning v Indonesian Army v v Indonesian Police v v Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 8 of 20 Culture, the Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning, the alert level, hazards potential and potential threatened Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of Health, the areas. Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Public Work and It is important to build long-standing relationships Housing, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry between scientists, stakeholders and the community of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral to communicate volcanic hazard. The communica - Resources, the Indonesian Army, and the Indonesian tion should start early on, during the preparedness time Police (Fig. 2). (Komorowski et al. 2018). Preparedness in anticipating In Indonesia, there are regulations that apply to disas- volcanic hazard includes preparation of hazard infor- ters because of their association with social, economic mation, including the type of hazard, hazard potential, and livelihood of the community. Disaster management potential threats, means of socialization, formulation of is therefore the responsible of all parties. a contingency plan, understanding the evacuation pro- cess, community exercises including evacuation drills, Communication Table-top exercises for disaster management officials Communicating hazard information is a full-time con- and Command Post Exercise following the formulation suming process, as the interaction between community of contingency plans. During the process of capacity (social) and scientists (physical perspectives) and disas- improvement in the preparedness stage, fostering com- ter management agencies (policy and practice) requires munication and networking between individuals and equity in hazard perception (Andreastuti et al. 2018). A groups encourages the development of trust. A clear shared understanding of hazard leads to understanding example is the formulation of contingency plans. In the the needs and how to meet them, and this is therefore a process of capacity building, taking different cultures key component of risk communication. into account is an important aspect in communication According to Fearnley and Beaven (2018), communi- and in understanding hazard (Gabrielsen et al. 2018, cation between scientists and decision makers depends Andreastuti et al. 2018, Marsh 2014, Bignami et al. 2012). on credibility of information, needs of the groups, and Lowenstern et al. (2022) proposed that scientists need to appropriateness of information and communication pro- understand local conditions, social cultures and priori- cesses. Credibility of information is challenged by evi- ties). The role of culture in Indonesia varies from place to dence of past experience, availability of data, and source place. According to Balasubramanian (2018), the estab- of information. Therefore, the time needed for commu - lishment of a culture is supported by geography. Culture nicating the risk depends on many factors: experience, and geography are connected in the way that culture rep- data, the means to communicate, and trust. Establishing resents the characteristic of people within an area. This a two-way communication process and dialogue is better is why, for example, religion and languages are different than just providing information (Stewart et al. 2018). in many places and how other identities of culture are Recent developments in communication technology produced. Therefore, the wide distribution of volcanoes have influenced the means of communication between across areas with different community cultures in Indo - stakeholders. Beside using fax, telephone, text mes- nesia necessitates a range of communication approaches sages, communication is also carried out through specific according to local culture. WhatsApp Groups (WAG), e.g. Pastigana (Pusat Analisis Here, we present good practices from Merapi, Agung Situasi Siaga Bencana, Center for Disaster Alert Situation and Sinabung in relation to evacuation and local culture. Analysis, owned by BNPB), Info Kebencanaan Geologi (Geological Disaster Information, CVGHM), and locally Merapi Diseminasi Penanggulangan Bencana Jawa Barat (Dis- Referring to Mei et al. (2013), there were total of 24,024 semination of West Java Disaster Management, West Java people from 12 villages within hazard zone III that were Province). evacuated on 26 October 2010, according to CVGHM The advantage of having these restricted but efficient recommendation. These villages are Purwobinangun, groups for communication, is that stakeholders involved Wonokerto, Girikerto, Hargobinangun, Umbulharjo, can share the information according to their mandate, Kepuharjo, Glagaharjo and Kaliurang Villages (Sle- and can also more effectively ask for information needed man Regency); Balerante, Sidorejo, and Tegalmulyo Vil- from other stakeholders. Communications with the lages (Klaten Regency); and Kemiren Village (Magelang decision maker is done also through regular meetings, Regency). workshops or informal meetings. In the case of crises, Here, we took lessons learned from Deles Hamlet, communication can be carried out both through regular Sidorejo Village (4 km from the Merapi summit to the meetings and anytime needed. It includes communica- southeast), Fig. 3. During the Merapi eruption in 2010, tion on a briefing sheet, explanations of exclusion zone, the head of Deles Hamlet took the initiative to evacuate A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 9 of 20 Fig. 3 Hazard map of Merapi Volcano (updated after the 2010 eruption). Red, pink and yellow colors on the map describe the Hazard Zone III (the highest), II (moderate) and I (the lowest). Dashed yellow, pink and red circle lines represent 10 km, 15 km and 20 km exclusion zones during the 2010 crisis. Blue solid lines showed the route of evacuation from Deles Hamlet to Manjung, and from Balerante to Kebondalem Village Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 10 of 20 his citizens to Kemalang District on 26 October 2010, unnecessary independent evacuation of the community one day after the level was raised to Level IV (Pramono during the crisis. A strategy to involve the community 2012), and livestock was evacuated on 27 October 2010 and religious leaders in public communication had an to the same place. The evacuation of the population was important role in improving trust in CVGHM (Syahbana completely managed shortly before an eruption hit Kalia- et al. 2019). dem Village in the south of Merapi, where ’Mbah Mari- For some people in the Mt. Agung community, the jan’, the volcano gatekeeper of Merapi was one of the 1963 large eruption left a deep trauma because of the casualties. When the eruption was getting bigger, and all wide impact, especially on the community around the evacuees needed to move outside a 20 km radius from volcano. It was a violent (Volcano Explosivity Index, VEI the summit, people from Deles Hamlet and Petung Vil- 5) eruption, and the eruption products and subsequent lage were reluctant to go without their livestock. Finally, lahar were distributed to the north, southeast, and south- they headed to Manjung Village (21 km from Merapi west resulting in more than 1000 fatalities (Global Vol- summit) with their livestock and lived there until the canism Program, GVP). activity of Merapi was back to normal. In fact, on the way During the 2017 – 2019 crisis, the total number of to Manjung, several villages were passed, but they could evacuees during the crisis reached 70,967 people dis- not accept them because the evacuees brought their live- tributed into 240 evacuation points (BPBD Provinsi stock with them during their evacuation, and the villages Bali). The process of evacuations was organized by the they passed were not able to provide facilities, because local government, but there were also independent livestock need mainly space, food, and water. During evacuations carried out by the community. During these their stay, all activities and facilities were coordinated by independent evacuation processes, people considered the head of Manjung Village. This independent evacua - kinship, customary similarities (e.g., languages, habits), tion is currently known as SISTER VILLAGE and rep- and past eruption experiences (Bagiarta, personal com- resents a good example of the two-way communication munication). Those people who experienced the 1963 process, and how dialogue can result in a better outcome eruption and their families went to the same place dur- for disaster risk mitigation. ing the 2017–2019 crisis, such as from Geriana Kauh to During the 2010 Merapi crisis, people from Balerante Gunaksa Village, in the southwest – west or from Pucang Village (about 5 km from Merapi summit to the south) to Tejakula or to Bondalem in north east—north. The were evacuated since 26 October 2010. At that time, long-distance journey to the final destination is due to the there was one person who stayed in the village and did experience of the 1963 eruption during which the impact not want to evacuate who then finally died because of did not reach these places. This experience reflects that pyroclastic flows from the 5 November 2010, the peak oral tradition occurred within the community. Figure 4 of Merapi eruptions. This village was partly affected by shows the examples of long evacuation routes because the eruption; therefore, people from the unaffected vil - they avoided hilly areas and roads that were difficult to lage were still going back and forth to their village to access. take care of their livestock. Learning from this experi- ence, since 2012 the community has been preparing a Sinabung volcano livestock evacuation to support people’s evacuation in On August 10, 2010, a phreatic eruption occurred at the case of a Merapi eruption in the future. This program Sinabung volcano after about 1200 years of dormancy was executed due to the reluctance of residents to evacu- (Prambada et al. 2010). The activity has been continuing ate because they were encouraged to leave their livestock and increasingly intensive. In 2013, lava flows began to at their homes during the 2010 eruption. Therefore, the appear and lasted about three years (Nakada et al. 2017). community has been preparing for the Temporary and Currently, the activity of Mount Sinabung is relatively Final Livestock Evacuation located about 5 km at Baler- low (at the time of writing this article, at the Alert Level ante Village, Kemalang District, Klaten Regency, and II). At the beginning of the activity, the knowledge and 7 km from the summit at Kebondalem, Prambanan Dis- response of the community to anticipate the eruption trict, Klaten Regency (Fig. 3). were still lacking due to the volcano’s long repose time. The increasing activity from August 2010 to 2014 Agung volcano resulted in the impact of pyroclastic flow on southern The volcanic crisis at Mount Agung occurred in 2017– flank villages, such as Sukameriah, Bekerah, and Simacem 2019 after more than 50 years of dormancy. Insufficient villages. Sukameriah was the first village impacted by knowledge and false information stating that an eruption pyroclastic flows. During their evacuation, there were was imminent resulted in inappropriate response and similar routes taken by the Sukameriah people. The route A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 11 of 20 Fig. 4 Map showing the distribution of eruption products and subsequent lahar of Agung to north, southeast and southwest flank (GVP, Syahbana et al. 2019). Solid and dashed circle lines showed the exclusion zones during the 2017–2019 crisis (Syahbana et al. 2019). Light blue and purple solid lines are the evacuation routes considering people’s experience from the 1963 eruption. Yellow and light green areas indicate the few locations of casualties due to the 1963 eruption was to Gukinayan Village, and in case the eruption was implies a lack of understanding of hazard and its risk. getting bigger, they moved further to Sipayung Village In response to Sinabung activity, capacity improve- (Fig. 5). ment of the Sinabung community has been carried From 2010 to 2015, in most cases, the Sinabung out, and it is still in progress. Several efforts have been community managed to evacuate after an eruption done including formulation of a contingency plan for occurred, which was represented by the number of eruption and lahar, evacuation drills, training for vol- evacuees during the Sinabung crisis (https:// web. karok cano facilitators and preparation of disaster resilience ab. go. id/ profi le/ illus trati on- umum). This situation villages. Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 12 of 20 Fig. 5 a (left). Hazard Map of Sinabung (Gunawan 2013). The 2014 PDC was produced at the beginning of magmatic activity (light purple color). Red, pink and yellow color represent Hazard Zone III (the highest), Hazard Zone II (moderate) and Hazard Zone I (the lowest). Dashed red, pink and yellow circles represent areas affected by fall deposits. Long red dashed circle indicates is the exclusion zone (3 km radius). Evacuation route from Sukameriah to Gurukinayan to Sipayung villages is shown in black solid lines. b (right) describes the progress of PDC distribution from 2014 to 2018 Discussion positive outcomes by consensus and mutual deliberation Indonesia is a country prone to geological disasters, (Effendi 2013). The examples of evacuation processes in including volcanic eruptions. In 2022, there were about Merapi, Agung and Sinabung also reflect the importance ten eruptions that occurred per month (CHGHM Inter- of Gotong royong within the community. Communica- nal report 2022). The frequent occurrence of volcanic tion and coordination were carried out before, during eruptions from different volcanoes provides a unique and after the process of evacuation in informal, egalitar- opportunity to learn lessons, not only from the scien- ian, and emphatic manners. The nature of residents who tific point of view itself but also from the characteristics have the intention of helping each other causes residents and behaviours of communities surrounding each indi- who live on the lower slopes (e.g. Manjung Village, Mer- vidual volcano. The response of community from Merapi, api Volcano; Tejakula Village, Agung Volcano; Sipayung Agung and Sinabung volcanoes to alert level information Village, Sinabung Volcano) to help residents from the and how they took action reflected different capacity and upper slopes (Deles Hamlet, Merapi Volcano; Pucang, disaster experience of the community. However, all of Agung Volcano; Sukameriah, Sinabung Volcano); this them implemented communication according local cul- was implemented in the evacuation process. The activi - ture, such as in finding a suitable village as an evacuation ties of Gotong royong reflect social capital that prioritizes site. common interests. Social capital also incorporates trust Kinship is the dominant factor in culture commu- (Fukuyama 1995) and the value of social networks. In a nication in order to find better solutions mainly dur - society with a strong tradition, communication to decide ing difficult times such as in a volcanic crisis. The word important issues usually uses consensus and deliberation, of Gotong royong (mutual cooperation) is part of local whether the communication is between the members of wisdom that has been developed as a heritage in Indo- the community, or between informal and formal lead- nesia, to be implemented within communities to obtain ers. This approach has also been implemented in disaster A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 13 of 20 mitigation to improve capacity building of communi- in a contingency plan. The stakeholders involved in an ties and has led to increased preparedness and resilience Emergency Alert and Emergency Response can be seen (Andreastuti et al. 2019). Consensual and deliberation in Fig. 2. approaches have also been used by the Popocatépetl The community’s need and resources for potential evac - Scientific Committee in assessing the activity of Pop - uation (level III), is calculated based on recommendations ocatépetl (de la Cruz-Reyna 2018). Moreover, improved of the Exclusion Zone on the hazard map. For example, awareness also occurs with updated and continuous in Fig. 6, the potential direction of the eruption products information mainly during crisis and non-crisis (De la and the threatened area, illustrates the number of people Cruz-Reyna et al. 2018). in the potentially affected area. These needs are described Disaster experiences of communities are also a contrib- in the contingency plan of Sinabung. The hazard map is uting factor to take action in response to volcanic erup- commonly presented in increasing detail according to the tion. The main problem for communities when it comes current potential hazard and the progress of activity (e.g., to evacuate is the unwillingness to leave their belongings, development of sector-specific pyroclastic flows, such as namely livestock and plantations, therefore, some peo- in Sinabung, see Fig. 6). Maps are commonly adjusted as ple who stayed in the shelter wanted to go back to their a crisis progresses, such as at Merapi (Lavigne et al. 2018). village to check their possessions. Evacuation of Merapi The current hazard potential can be seen from the communities during the crisis had been encouraged by exclusion zone (red dashed line) and the possible local government, however due to no facilitation for live- threatened villages can be identified, and the needs and stock evacuation, the Deles people initiate an independ- resources estimated, for contingency planning. The con - ent evacuation that included their livestock. On the other tingency plan is formulated by stakeholders with the hand, the experience of the large eruption of Agung com- involvement of the community. This is a good strategy munity in 1963 resulted in some people displaced to the to strengthen the capacity of the community in decision same villages during the volcanic crisis in 2017–2019. making. Strengthening the community capacity using a Figure 4 shows the distribution of deposits from the 1963 bottom-up approach (e.g., Andreastuti et al. 2018) can- eruption. That area was safe from the effects of the 1963 not work smoothly without the support of the govern- eruption (e.g. the displacement from Pucang to Tejakula ment officials (top down) (Cadag et al. 2018, Lavigne and Bondalem Villages, at the north east of Agung). Simi- et al. 2018). According to the Law of the Republic Indo- larly, the Sinabung community followed the same paths nesia Number 24 Year 2007, concerning Disaster Man- when an eruption was getting bigger and an evacuation agement and Government Regulation No 21 Year 2008, needed. Evacuation being repeatedly carried out from Government and Local Government shall have Disas- Sukameriah to Gurukinayan and to Sipayung Villages ter Management Plans which are updated every five indicates kinship and good communication between years. The Disaster Management Plan is integrated with those villages. National Development Plans. Formulation of Disaster In Indonesia, the alert level includes the relations and Management Plans is coordinated by Disaster Manage- communication of the different actors involved and com - ment Agency according to the level (National, Provincial, munity preparedness during volcanic crisis (Andreas- Local). It includes recognition and evaluation of disaster tuti et. al. 2018, p.309, p.318). As alert level III issued by threat, vulnerability, evaluation of disaster impact, risk CVGHM and is informed to BNPB and BPBD, they will analysis and education, mechanism of preparedness and follow up the information by coordinating stakehold- management on disaster impact. ers to prepare for the need and facilities, such as evacu- Experience of volcanic crisis has proven to influence ation and preparation of shelter, etc. According to the hazard perception and to improve the awareness of the Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic Number community (Andreastuti et al. 2018, McKee et. al. 2018), 17 Year 2018, disaster emergency status includes Siaga and has led to independent evacuation. As an example, Darurat (Emergency Alert), Tanggap Darurat (Emer- before the Kelud eruption on 13 February 2014 at 22:50, gency Response), dan Transisi Darurat ke Pemulihan the Kelud community evacuated independently due (Emergency Transition to Recovery). Communication to high autonomy and participation of the community between stakeholders and preparation of communities is (Sudarmanto, 2020). Part of the communication amongst started at Emergency Alert when CVGHM issues Alert people around Kelud was through radio communication Level III. In Level IV, BNPB/BPBD will activate the con- and informal socialization (Lestari et al. 2017). This activ - tingency plan and order the evacuation. Each alert level ity was carried out willingly by the community mem- is associated with an activity of the community, which bers and coordinated by official leaders (Sub-District represent the needs and resources that shall be provided Chief of Ngancar) (Nugroho et al. 2015). The use of local Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 14 of 20 Fig. 6 Hazard map of Sinabung (Gunawan et al. 2015). The current hazard potential (exclusion zones) is shown by sectoral distance in each sector, represented by red dashed lines. Color Symbols: red is Hazard Zone III (highest), pink is Hazard Zone II (medium) and yellow is Hazard Zone I (lowest) radio stations to facilitate interactive communication In Indonesia, these ‘volcano watchers’ exist at volcanoes was also successfully used at Mt Cameroon (del Marmol that have experienced eruptions in the past. et al. 2018). Improvement of the capacity of the community occurs with their participation and the role of local leader. On Learning from good communication the other hand, participation can also be used to identify Communication with the decision makers can be via for- problems within the community, such as ‘actual’ level mal and/or informal ways. Sometimes direct personal of knowledge, capacity and their understanding of haz- communication is more effective, especially during crisis ard. According to Cadag et. al (2018) participation will times (Newhall and Solidum 2018). A valuable learning encourage communities to empower and build dialogue. experience of this occurred during the activity of Mer- In this way, participatory risk management involving api in 2010. The personal involvement of the Governor community leaders and the population is most appropri- of Jogjakarta to displace people due to the extension of ate to bridge between traditional practices, local realities, exclusion zone from 10 to 15 km resulted in a much more and the implementation of risk management policies and organized and faster evacuation of Merapi community strategies (Lavigne et al. 2018). because of the order of decision maker (Sayudi, personal Cronin et al. (2004), used the method of participa- communication 2019). tion (Participatory Rural Approach, PRA) on Ambae Personal communication can also be implemented Island, Vanuatu, to identify problems of the local com- through the local community as ‘volcano watchers’ such munity through traditional knowledge. These problems as in Sinabung, Merapi, and Kelud. People from the include volcanic hazards visualization, communication community can play a role as photographers (Fig. 7), systems, gender and hierarchy conflicts. Andreastuti journalists, or by providing information to CVGHM et al. (2019) proposed that communication and partici- about anomalies in activity or changes in morphology. pation of the community can be improved through the A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 15 of 20 Fig. 7 Morphology of Sinabung summit before and after the 13 May 2021 eruption. Photos taken by CVGHM staff (left) and by ‘volcano watcher’ Sugeng Nuryono (Maz Yons, right) characteristics of the community as represented by cul- 1) observing the disaster characteristics, ture, disaster experience, local capacity and vulnerability, 2) analyzing the data of observation results, and supported by the presence of local leaders, and social 3) making decisions based on analysis results, networking. However, Miles et al. (2018) argued that 4) dissemination of decision results, and experience of disaster is significant in shaping the behav - 5) taking action by the community. ior of disaster managers, and that risk communication can shape community resilience and non-compliance This describes the span of process from science infor - of the community, as reported from experiences at Mt mation, decision making and implementation to the com- Cameroon volcano. munity. The Volcano Alert Level is part of early warning Another manner of personal communication is through and the result of the first three activities. WAG. This is different from WAG mentioned before, For proper implementation of a scale of volcanic activ- which are at national and provincial level. Some WAGs ity in each country, in addition to the scientific aspects, are composed of decision makers of local districts, local it is necessary to also take into consideration the existing heads of police, Regional Disaster Management Agency systems or regulations applicable in the given country. (such as Sinabung, Kelimutu, Iya), which is owned by The character of each individual volcano has a big influ - Sinabung, Kelimutu and Iya Observatory Posts. Kelimutu ence on the determination of the alert level. In countries and Iya are examples of volcanoes in East Nusa Tenggara with a high number of volcanoes such as Indonesia, a that at the time of writing are at Normal level I, but have general definition of alert levels is more applicable. already established communication with local stakehold- In Indonesia, the aims of having an alert level system ers from government institutions, including the Regional are to communicate volcano hazard information and to Disaster Management Agency, and local and cultural provide recommendations for decision making, stake- leaders. holders, and the community, as well as to prepare action plans depending on the state of volcanic activity. Accord- ing to Papale (2017), the alert level is used by volcan- Communication of volcano alert level ologists to communicate the condition or state of the According to the Presidential Decree of Indonesia Num- volcano. He also highlighted that such system did not ber 8 Year 2008 concerning National Disaster Manage- have a predictive capacity, and that it did not include ment Agency, Early Warning activities include: Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 16 of 20 the confidence levels of the knowledge of volcanolo - by evaluation of activity of volcanoes above normal level. gist according to the alert level. The skill and knowledge The involvement of stakeholders is carried out during of volcanologists are important, but other parameters the formulation of a contingency plan. At the end of the also need to be considered, not only scientific, and also activity, this is tested by simulations (TTX, Table-top the importance of how it is communicated to the deci- Exercise). sion maker and community. As it is mentioned above, the In the case of crisis, the eruption scenario is only shared alert level is not useful if it is not properly communicated among limited people (e.g. Incident Commander/IC and to the stakeholders and public, and if it does not include key stakeholders/local government, BNPB and BPBD). an action plan to improve the awareness of community. During a crisis, several scenarios are prepared and the IC Fearnley and Beaven (2018) emphasized the importance needs to know all scenarios in order to arrange needs and of communication between scientists and stakeholders resources in the event of an eruption. Each scenario is to ensure that the information and its processes are valid developed according to the estimated activity based on a and acceptable by all involved. hazard assessment. However, only general information is A good example of the importance of and successful shared with the public, including the least technical data, use of an alert level system was in the eruption of Pina- in order to minimize confusion. If the eruption scenario tubo in 1991 (Punongbayan et al. 2012, Newhall and changes, this information will be shared with the public, Solidum 2018). The alert level system was able to pro - complemented by a directive recommendation. Each sce- vide simplified information according to the level of vol - nario reflects the intensity of the eruption and different canic activity that was able to address a large and diverse areas of potential hazards and is therefore related to the population, with various degrees of knowledge of hazard. plan of action led by the IC. Taking into account the case examples of Indonesia and A well-established alert system may also reduce a the Philippines, we find that the alert level is a suitable biased interpretation, and as well as increase the speed system to use in case of increasing of volcanic activity. and accuracy of information. When the level of activity Papale (2017) notes that alert level tables are dominantly is provided by agencies that are not involved in moni- developed and used through an ‘intuitive approach’, rather toring, in addition to possible interpretations of the than through rational thinking that should drive scientific volcano status, it will take longer to make decisions evaluations. and thus increasing the risk of the threatened commu- Referring to above quotation, an alert level is a simple nity. The main point of communicating the alert level form of communication between scientists, stakehold- during times of high activity is to provide recommen- ers and the general public that aims to provide directive dations and a strategy to minimize casualties within a information that makes people understand what to do short time frame. This communication is challenged by without having to make their own interpretation. People technical needs, bureaucracy, the time frame, compet- can have different perceptions about probability percent - ing agencies, and trust. These parameters may hinder ages even if it is more logical from volcanologists’ points the process. Sophisticated language and delicate sci- of view. For example, during the 2015 Raung volcano ence need to be avoided during communication to deci- crisis, CVGHM issued recommendation of 3 km exclu- sion makers. At the end, the decision maker only needs sion zone. However, local BPBD (Jember, Banyuwangi to know the trusted and relevant outcome and to act and Bondowoso Regencies) were influenced by the opin - according to the result. ion of independent research institutions, which cannot be scientifically justified. They prepared a contingency Community preparedness and response plan with a 20 km radius of exclusion zone. This situation Risk communication in Indonesia is not only the respon- mislead the community and caused a chaotic situation. sibility of the Government, but also the task of disaster For this reason BNPB forced BPBD to resolve the issue management agency, private sector agencies, and the by following the CVGHM recommendation. Alert levels community. Therefore, capacity building of all groups is are qualitative in nature but are inferred from quantita- important. Cooperation from various sectors is necessary tive analysis of scientific monitoring data. Determination to achieve effective and optimal disaster mitigation. of eruption probabilities requires experience and careful consideration, including educational level and cultural A communication gap between the scientists, decision factors in a particular area. makers, and the community Information of an alert level and its associated recom- Why is there a gap of communication between the sci- mendations is given regularly to stakeholders according entists and the community? The gap exists mainly due to the volcanic activities (Table 1). It is complemented to the level of knowledge related to volcano hazard. An A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 17 of 20 example was found in the Sinabung community at the Conclusion beginning of activity in 2010 – 2012. A gap between sci- The system of volcano alert levels used in Indonesia entists and decision makers was identified, as the deci - describes the potential impact of the volcanic behavior to sion makers responded slowly, did not understand the the surrounding communities, including the exclusion time pressure and urgency of needs during a crisis. This zones, potentially threatened areas, and actions that need happened in Sinabung, North Sumatera and the 2013 to be taken. Communication of volcano hazards to stake- Egon eruption in East Nusa Tenggara. In the Egon com- holders and the community is critical for planning meas- munity, most people wanted to evacuate without con- ures and for action to be taken. The alert level system alone sidering whether they did or did not live in the hazard is not useful if it is not communicated and followed by an zone. action plan to improve the awareness of the community. The communication gap can relate to the question: This can be carried out through community-based prepar - how to convey proper and understandable information? edness activities. Community-based preparedness includes There are two main ways to think about how to better using a culture-based approach, facilitating strong rela- convey information. The social scientist can learn about tionships and participation as the community learns and the volcano and translate the information to the com- improves its capacity according to its customs. munity, or the volcanologist learns how to communicate Previous experience shows the need to protect live- with the decision makers and the community. According stock without compromising personal safety, encourag- to Leonard and Potter (2015), the incorporation of social ing the community to take the initiative to innovate risk science and volcano information can be effectively used reduction and better evacuation planning. to lessen the risk of volcanic hazards to society. On the Independent evacuation of the Deles community in other hand, Marty (2015) proposed that direct commu- Merapi and the Kelud community reflect a strong rela - nication between scientist and public is able to influence tionship and leadership that is able to see the needs of the risk perception and the public confidence. Commu - the citizens and make the right decisions to save lives. nicating risk to a threatened community by both social The important key to self-evacuation compared to being scientists and volcanologists can be done as long as they evacuated is awareness of the risks where the population understand the information and have sufficient commu - understand what to do. The WLPB and SISTER VILLAGE nication skills to approach the population, uphold the programs are examples of community-based prepared- value of equality, and use inclusive and emphatic man- ness and represent a learning process to identify and fulfil ners. In reality, good communication between scientists needs through communication and coordination. and the decision makers and the community occurs with Personal communication between scientists and decision experience and through a good network, as it needs trust makers, and between scientists and the community is very between parties. The more frequent and continual the useful to build community resilience through self-responsi- communication, the more trust and connection that is bility and a sense of belonging. This process has already hap - built. This process needs to be supported by good coop - pened in communities that have to coexist with many, or/and eration between community and agencies involved in risk long and/or continuous eruptions (e.g. Kelud and Merapi). management. On the other hand, straightforward and Consensus and deliberation in risk communication is a non-technical language is needed to have effective com - bottom-up process, involving the community in decision munication. In the case of Indonesia’s communities, it is making and engagement with the government. At the important to approach the community through its cul- end, it is a joint effort between scientists, decision mak - ture, and this varies from place to place. There are some ers and the community. In the long-term, facilities and examples of high trust between the public and scientist/ infrastructure need to be developed together with the governments, such as in Kelud (Andreastuti et al. 2019) improvement of capacity and progress in spatial planning and Merapi (Subandriyo et al. 2019). Risk communica- to strengthen resilience to volcanic hazards. tion also should be maintained during normal situations During a volcano crisis, the response to volcanic phe- when there is no crisis, in order to facilitate communica- nomenon and its impact to social, economic and politic tion during a crisis (Donovan and Oppenheimer 2018). aspects cannot be separated, and thus proper actions The communication between scientist, stakeholders and need to include various sides and stakeholders. During the community needs to be carried out in a direct or the implementation of the response, an agency needs indirect manner during periods of quiescence. This can to bridge between all these components as coordinator be done through joint Disaster Risk Reduction Program, in order to facilitate communication and have an effec - such as WLPB or other related activities (e.g. SISTER tive and successful outcome. The NDMA of Indonesia VILLAGE), so that communication can be established has this function in order to facilitate an integrated long before a crisis occurs. action in disaster management. Indonesia has a system Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 18 of 20 Declarations of institutions that manage science, and others that are responsible for social aspect, including evacuation, ref- Competing interests ugee handling, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. All Not applicable. these aspects of disaster risk need policies to support Author details public needs before, during, and after a crisis occurs. Centre for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation, Geological Agency, This includes availability and access to information, Bandung, Indonesia. Universitas Pembangunan Nasional ‘Veteran’, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. social protection, education, training and skill develop- ment for disaster management. Finally, each individual Received: 26 November 2021 Accepted: 28 April 2023 volcano provides unique lessons and occasionally raises new questions and problems that need to be solved. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out reviews on previ - ous strategies after a disaster has occurred to obtain a References better result in the future. Adi IB, Wacana P, Purwanto S, Widdiyanto S Pembangkang dari G, Merapi (2015) Seputar pengalaman belajar bersama komunitas lereng Merapi. In: Paripurno ET, editor. https:// mmb. upnyk. ac. id/ downl oad Andreastuti S, Budianto A, Paripurno ET (2018) Integrating social and physical Abbreviations perspectives of mitigation policy and practice in Indonesia. In: Fearnley BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (National Disaster CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano Management Agency/NDMA) World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 307–320 BPBD Provinsi Provincial Disaster Management Agency Andreastuti S, Paripurno ET, Gunawan H, Budianto H, Syahbana DK (2019) BPBD Kabupaten/Kota Regional Disaster Management Agency for Regency/ Character of community response to volcanic crises at Sinabung and City Kelud volcanoes. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 382:298–310. https:// doi. org/ CBDRM Community-based Disaster Risk Management 10. 1016/j. jvolg eores. 2017. 01. 022 CVGHM C entre for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation Astriani F (2017) Mitigasi bencana gunung Merapi berbasis desa bersaudara BMKG Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi and Geofisika (Meteorological, (Sister Village) di Kecamatan Musuk Kabupaten Boyolali Jawa Tengah (BSc Climatological and Geophysical Agency Thesis). Fakultas Geografi Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta GVP Global Volcanism Program Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah (BPBD) Kabupaten Magelang (2016) IC Incident Commander Kebijakan Penanggulangan Bencana di Kabupaten Magelang. Badan MAGMA Multiplatform Application for Geohazard Mitigation and Assess- Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah Kabupaten Magelang, Magelang ment in Indonesia Balasubramanian A (2018) Basics of cultural geography. Project: Educational SFDRR S endai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction Video Documentaries in Earth. Atmospher Ocean Sci. https:// doi. org/ 10. SBY Susilo Bambag Yudhoyono 13140/ RG.2. 2. 31894. 65604 UNDRR Unit ed Nation Disaster Risk Reduction Becker JS, Leonard GS, Potter SH, Coomer MA, Paton D, Wright KC et al (2018) UNISDR Unit ed Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Organisational response to the 2007 Ruapehu Crater Lake dam-break VAR Volcano Activity Report lahar in New Zealand: Use of communication in creating an effective VEN V olcano Eruption Notice response. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) VON Volcano Observation Notice for Aviation, Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 253–269 VEI Volcano Explosivity Index Bignami C, Bosi V, Costantini L, Cristiani C, Lavigne F, Thierry P (2012) Handbook WLPB Wajib Latih Penanggulangan Bencana (Compulsory Disaster for volcanic risk management: prevention, crisis management, resilience. Management Training Program) MIAVITA team, Orleans http://miavita.brgm.fr Cadag JR, Driedger C, Garcia C, Duncan M, Gaillard JC, Lindsay J et al (2018) Acknowledgements Fostering participation of local actors in volcanic disaster risk reduction. We would like to thank to the Head of CVGHM that provided us the oppor- In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing tunity to be in the field during volcanic crisis. We also would like to thank the volcano world. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 474–496 the Quick Response Teams (Sinabung, Merapi, Kelud and Agung Volcanoes), Chatfield AT, Reddick CG (2015) Understanding risk communication gaps including observers at these volcanoes, and local governments. We also highly through e-government website and twitter hashtag content analyses: appreciated the Institute for Research and Community Service, Universitas The case of Indonesia’s Mt. Sinabung eruption. Homeland Secur Emerg Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta for supporting these activities. Manag 12(2):351–385 Finally, our deepest appreciation to Prof. Fidel Costa for proofreading and CHGHM Internal Report (2022) Laporan Kelompok Kerja Tim Penyiapan Bahan providing valuable suggestions. Sosialisasi Informasi Gunung Api Wilayah Timur, Tahun 2021 (in Indone- sian), Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation Authors’ contributions Cronin SJ, Gaylord DR, Charley D, Alloway BV, Wallez S, Esau JW (2004) Partici- SA prepared the first and second manuscripts, Figs. 1 and 2, EP contributed on patory methods of incorporating scientific with traditional knowledge for the discussion of risk communication and CBDRM, SS contributed on WLPB, DS volcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Vanuatu. Bull Volcanol. prepared detailed discussion on alert level to improve the manuscript, AP prepared 66:652–668. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00445- 004- 0347-9 Figs. 3, 4 and 5. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript. Decree of Head of National Disaster Management Agency (2014) No 11 concerning the participation of public in disaster management. Badan Funding Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia SA, SS, DS and AP were funded by the Center for Volcanology and Geological Haz- De la Cruz-Reyna S, Tilling RI, Valdés-González C (2018) Challenges in respond- ard Mitigation, Geological Agency, Indonesia. EP funded by Institute for Research ing to a sustained, continuing volcanic crisis: The case of Popocatépetl and Community Service, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta. volcano, Mexico, 1994-present. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Availability of data and materials Heidelberg, pp 235–252 Not applicable. del Marmol MA, Fontijn K, Atanga M, Njome S, Mafany G, Tening A et al (2018) Investigating the management of geological hazards and risks in the Mt Cameroon area using Focus Group Discussions. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 19 of 20 DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. analysis of affected communities’ evacuation response Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 373–394 during the 2014. J Appl Volcanol 10(6):1–24 Direktorat Vulkanologi, Prosedur Tetap Mitigasi Bencana Gunungapi, Published Marty J (2015) Summary: scientific communication of uncertainty during by Direktorat Vulkanologi, Direktorat Jendral Geologi dan Sumberdaya volcanic crises. In: Loughlin SC, Sparks S, Brown SK, Jenkins SF, Brown CV Mineral; 1996 (eds) Global volcanic hazards and risk, pp 72–73 Donovan A, Oppenheimer C (2018) Imagining the unimaginable: Com- McKee C, Itikarai I, Davies H (2018) Instrumental volcano surveillance and com- municating extreme volcanic risk. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, munity awareness in the lead-up to the 1994 eruptions at Rabaul, Papua McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, New Guinea. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Heidelberg, pp 149–164 Observing the volcano world. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 204–233 Eendi ff TN (2013) Community Gotong Royong culture in current social change Mei ETW, Lavigne F, Picquout A, de Bélizal E, Brunstein D, Grancher D et al (in Indonesia). J Pemikiran Sosiol 2:1–17 (2013) Lessons learned from the 2010 evacuations at Merapi volcano. J Elysia V, Widahanto A (2018) The Sister Village program: Promoting community Volcanol Geotherm Res 261:348–365 resilience after Merapi eruption. Indones J Plan Dev. https:// doi. org/ 10. Miles L, Gordon R, Bang H (2018) Blaming active volcanoes or active volcano 14710/ ijpd.3. 1. 32- 43 blame? In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Erfurt-Cooper P (2018) Active hydrothermal features as tourist attractions. In: Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 395–409 Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Nakada S, Zaennudin A, Yoshimoto M, Maeno F, Suzuki Y, Hokanishi N et al Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 85–105 (2017) Growth process of the lava dome/flow complex at Sinabung Fearnley CJ, Beaven S (2018) Volcano alert level systems: managing the chal- volcano during 2013–2016. J Volcanol Geotherm Res. https:// doi. org/ 10. lenges of effective volcanic crisis communication. Bull Volcanol. 80(5):46. 1016/j. jvolg eores. 2017. 06. 012 https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00445- 018- 1219-z Newhall C, Solidum RU (2018) Volcanic hazard communication at Pinatubo Fukuyama Y (1995) Trust: The Social virtues and the creation of prosperity, vol from 1991 to 2015. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly 3. Hamish Hamilton Affairs, London, pp 187–203 G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp Gabrielsen H, Procter J, Rainforth H, Black T (2018) Reflections from an indig- 189–203 enous community on volcanic event management, communications and Nugroho SP, Diartoko P, Sulistyo R, Suryanto C, Yon KM, Aprilidia et al (2015) A resilience. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Community experience in managing Mount Kelud eruption. Story from Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 463–479 The East, BNPB, with support from Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Gaillard JC (2008) Alternative paradigm of volcanic risk perception: the Case of Reduction Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 172:315–328 Papale (2017) Rational volcanic hazard forecasts and the use of volcanic alert Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia (2008) No 21 concerning levels. J Appl Volcanol 6:13 disaster management Parent M, Vandebeek CA, Gemino AC (2005) Building citizen trust through Gunawan H, Mulyana AR, Solihin A, Pujowarsito, Riyadi (2013) Peta Kawasan e-government. Govern Inform Q 22(4):20–736 Rawan Bencana G. Sinabung, Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Paripurno ET, Nugroho ARB (2018) The effectiveness of community-based Geologi early warning system of Kelud volcano eruption. MATEC Web of Confer- Gunawan H, Mulyana AR, Solihin A, Pujowarsito, Riyadi (2015) Peta Kawasan ences 229, 03015. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1051/ matec conf/ 20182 29030 15 Rawan Bencana G. Sinabung, Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Prambada O, Zaenuddin A, Irianto Santosa I, Nakada M, Yoshimoto M (2010) Geologi Geological Map of Sinabung Volcano, Center for Volcanology and Geological https:// magma. vsi. esdm. go. id/ index. php on The Center for Geological Hazard Hazard Mitigation. Geological Agency, Bandung Mitigation website (n.d.) Pramono SM. Kami mengungsi bukan diungsikan. Pasag Merapi. 2012. https:// https:// mmb. upnyk. ac. id/ berita/ penin gkatan- kapas itas- masya rakat- gunung- pasag- merapi. blogs pot. com/ 2012/ 02/ kami- mengu ngsi- bukan- di- ungsi agung on The Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran website (n.d.)kan. html? fbclid= IwAR1 1XxIT 2kyiD iMpD4 u7y_ jJtCL ZaeiP dNlIz S0rk- https:// www. undrr. org/ termi nology on The UN UN for Disaster Risk Reduction gAWX8 xd3E5 H3KJG ZM. website (n.d.) Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic (2008) No 8 concerning national Indonesia National Standard no 8039-2018 Manajemen pelatihan kesiapsia- disaster management agency gaan terhadap bahaya erupsi gunungapi. Badan Standardisasi Nasional Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic (2018) No 17 concerning the Komorowski JC, Morin J, Jenkins S, Kelman I (2018) Challenges of volcanic cri- arrangement of disaster management in certain condition during a ses on Small Islands States. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, volcanic crisis Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Punongbayan RS, Newhall CG, Bautista LP, Garcia D, Harlow DH, Hoblitt RP, pp 353–371 Sabit JP, Solidum RU. Eruption hazard assessments and warnings. 2012. Lavigne F, Morin J, Mei ETW, Calder ES, Usamah M, Nugroho U (2018) Mapping https:// pubs. usgs. gov/ pinat ubo/ punon g2/ index. html. hazard zones, rapid warning communication and understanding com- Rahman MB (2016) Community resilience: Learning from Mt Merapi eruption munities: Primary ways to mitigate pyroclastic flow hazard. In: Fearnley 2010. Proc Soc Behav Sci:387–394. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. sbspro. 2016. CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano 06. 090 World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 106–119 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) (2015-2030). United Law of the Republic of Indonesia (2007) No 24 concerning disaster Nations management Stewart C, Wilson TM, Sword-Daniels V, Wallace KL, Magill CR, Horwell C et al Law of the Republic of Indonesia (2007) No 26 concerning spatial planning (2018) Communication demands of volcanic ashfall events. In: Fearnley Leonard G, Potter S (2015) Developing effective communication tools for CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano volcanic hazards in New Zealand, using social science. In: Loughlin SC, World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 23–49 Sparks S, Brown SK, Jenkins SF, Brown CV (eds) Global Volcanic Hazards Subandriyo, Sayudi D, Putra R (2019) Survei persepsi masyarakat sebagai and Risk, pp 305–310 dasar evaluasi program pelatihan penanggulangan bencana di Kawasan Lestari FA, Susilo TEB, Khaerudin (2017) Communication as an effort to disaster Rawan Bencana G. The International Conference on Disaster Manage- risk reduction for society (in Indonesian). J Prodi Manajemen Bencana 3:1 ment, ICDM. Pertemuan Ilmiah Tahunan (PIT ) ke-6, Ikatan Ahli Kebenca- Lowenstern JB, Wallace K, Barsotti S, Sandri L, Stovall W, Bernard B, Privitera E, naan Indonesia (IABI), BOGOR, Merapi Komorowski JC, Fournier N, Balagizi C, Garaebiti E (2022) Guidelines for Sudarmanto S (2020) Peran Komunitas Jangkar Kelud dalam membangun ket- volcano-observatory operations during crises: recommendations from angguhan masyarakat di sekitar G. Kelud (Studi tentang peran Komunitas the 2019 volcano observatory best practices meeting. J Appl Volcanol Jangkar Kelud pra, saat, dan paska erupsi G. Kelud tahun 2014, di Kabu- 11:3 (1–24) paten Blitar, Kediri dan Malang). (MSc Theses). Universitas Pembangunan Marsh T (2014) Talking safety: a user’s guide to world class safety conversation. Nasional Veteran, Yogyakarta. https:// eprin ts. upnyk. ac. id/ id/ eprint/ 22022 Gower Publishing, 126 pages Syahbana DK, Kasbani K, Suantika G, Prambada O, Andreas AS, Saing UB et al Martinez-Villegas MM, Solidum RU Jr, Saludadez JA, Pidlaoan AC, Ruben (2019) The 2017–19 activity at Mount Agung in Bali (Indonesia): intense C, Lamela RC (2021) Moving for safety: a qualitative Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 20 of 20 unrest, monitoring, crisis response, evacuation, and eruption. Nature 9:8848. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598- 019- 45295-9 Scientific Reports UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction (2009), United Nations United Nation Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (2016) https:// www. undrr. org/ termi nology/ mitig ation Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (2014) At risk: natural hazards, people vul- nerability and disasters, 2nd edn. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4324/ 97802 03714 775 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in pub- lished maps and institutional affiliations. Re Read ady y to to submit y submit your our re researc search h ? Choose BMC and benefit fr ? Choose BMC and benefit from om: : fast, convenient online submission thorough peer review by experienced researchers in your ﬁeld rapid publication on acceptance support for research data, including large and complex data types • gold Open Access which fosters wider collaboration and increased citations maximum visibility for your research: over 100M website views per year At BMC, research is always in progress. Learn more biomedcentral.com/submissions http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Applied Volcanology Springer Journals http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/springer-journals/volcano-disaster-risk-management-during-crisis-implementation-of-risk-u8aTFO2l0J

Loading next page...

References (55)

(2018)
Manajemen pelatihan kesiapsiagaan terhadap bahaya erupsi gunungapi
W. Yi, Y. Maharani, Jitae Kim, Sungsu Lee (2018)
The Effectiveness of Community-Based Early Warning System of Kelud Volcano Eruption
Journal of the Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation
M Parent, CA Vandebeek, AC Gemino (2005)
Building citizen trust through e-government
Govern Inform Q, 22
Jake Cadag, C. Driedger, Carolina García, Melanie Duncan, J. Gaillard, J. Lindsay, K. Haynes (2017)
Fostering Participation of Local Actors in Volcanic Disaster Risk Reduction
J. Becker, G. Leonard, S. Potter, M. Coomer, D. Paton, K. Wright, D. Johnston (2017)
Organisational Response to the 2007 Ruapehu Crater Lake Dam-Break Lahar in New Zealand: Use of Communication in Creating an Effective Response
S. Cruz-Reyna, R. Tilling, C. Valdés-González (2017)
Challenges in Responding to a Sustained, Continuing Volcanic Crisis: The Case of Popocatépetl Volcano, Mexico, 1994-Present
(2013)
Community Gotong Royong culture in current social change (in Indonesia)
C. McKee, I. Itikarai, H. Davies (2017)
Instrumental Volcano Surveillance and Community Awareness in the Lead-Up to the 1994 Eruptions at Rabaul, Papua New Guinea
S. Nakada, A. Zaennudin, M. Yoshimoto, F. Maeno, Yuki Suzuki, N. Hokanishi, Hisashi Sasaki, M. Iguchi, T. Ohkura, H. Gunawan, H. Triastuty (2017)
Growth process of the lava dome/flow complex at Sinabung Volcano during 2013–2016
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research
Kevin Quigley (1996)
Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity
Orbis, 40
Ma. Martinez-Villegas, R. Solidum, J. Saludadez, A. Pidlaoan, Ruben Lamela (2021)
Moving for safety: a qualitative analysis of affected communities’ evacuation response during the 2014 Mayon Volcano eruption
Journal of Applied Volcanology, 10
E. Mei, F. Lavigne, A. Picquout, E. Belizal, D. Brunstein, Delphine Grancher, J. Sartohadi, Noer Cholik, C. Vidal (2013)
Lessons learned from the 2010 evacuations at Merapi volcano
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 261
D. Syahbana, K. Kasbani, G. Suantika, Oktory Prambada, A. Andreas, U. Saing, S. Kunrat, S. Andreastuti, M. Martanto, E. Kriswati, Y. Suparman, H. Humaida, S. Ogburn, P. Kelly, J. Wellik, H. Wright, J. Pesicek, R. Wessels, C. Kern, M. Lisowski, A. Diefenbach, M. Poland, F. Beauducel, F. Beauducel, J. Pallister, R. Vaughan, J. Lowenstern (2019)
The 2017–19 activity at Mount Agung in Bali (Indonesia): Intense unrest, monitoring, crisis response, evacuation, and eruption
Scientific Reports, 9
C. Fearnley, S. Beaven (2018)
Volcano alert level systems: managing the challenges of effective volcanic crisis communication
Bulletin of Volcanology, 80
Observing the Volcano World
(2023)
fast, convenient online submission • thorough peer review by experienced researchers in your field • rapid publication on acceptance • support for research
J. Komorowski, Julie Morin, S. Jenkins, I. Kelman (2016)
Challenges of Volcanic Crises on Small Islands States
L. White, M. Farmer, J. Brody (1984)
WHO IS AT RISK
Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 10
E. Paripurno, A. Nugroho (2018)
The effectiveness of community-based early warning system of Kelud volcano eruption 2014
, 229
(2015)
Summary: scientific communication of uncertainty during volcanic crises
F. Lavigne, Julie Morin, E. Mei, E. Calder, M. Usamah, Ute Nugroho (2017)
Mapping hazard zones, rapid warning communication and understanding communities: primary ways to mitigate pyroclastic flow hazard
(2016)
Bencana Daerah (BPBD) Kabupaten Magelang (2016) Kebijakan Penanggulangan Bencana di Kabupaten Magelang
P. Erfurt-Cooper (2017)
Active hydrothermal features as tourist attractions
(2018)
Basics of cultural geography. Project: Educational Video Documentaries in Earth
C. Stewart, T. Wilson, V. Sword-Daniels, K. Wallace, C. Magill, C. Horwell, G. Leonard, P. Baxter (2016)
Communication Demands of Volcanic Ashfall Events
B. Behncke, Jochen Berger, S. Jenkins, M. Neri, R. Spence, K. Stahr (2012)
Handbook for volcanic risk management: Prevention, Crisis management, Resilience
J. Lowenstern, K. Wallace, S. Barsotti, L. Sandri, Wendy Stovall, B. Bernard, E. Privitera, J. Komorowski, N. Fournier, C. Balagizi, E. Garaebiti (2022)
Guidelines for volcano-observatory operations during crises: recommendations from the 2019 volcano observatory best practices meeting
Journal of Applied Volcanology, 11
(2018)
Blaming active volcanoes or active volcano blame
G. Leonard, S. Potter (2015)
Global Volcanic Hazards and Risk: Developing effective communication tools for volcanic hazards in New Zealand, using social science
(2012)
Kami mengungsi bukan diungsikan
(2015)
A Community experience in managing Mount Kelud eruption. Story from The East, BNPB, with support from Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction
S. Cronin, D. Gaylord, D. Charley, B. Alloway, S. Wallez, J. Esau (2004)
Participatory methods of incorporating scientific with traditional knowledge for volcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Vanuatu
Bulletin of Volcanology, 66
H. Gabrielsen, J. Procter, H. Rainforth, Tai Black, G. Harmsworth, N. Pardo (2017)
Reflections from an Indigenous Community on Volcanic Event Management, Communications and Resilience
P. Papale (2017)
Rational volcanic hazard forecasts and the use of volcanic alert levels
Journal of Applied Volcanology, 6
Michael Parent, Christine Vandebeek, Andrew Gemino (2004)
Building citizen trust through e-government
37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the
(2010)
Geological Map of Sinabung Volcano, Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation
S. Andreastuti, E. Paripurno, H. Gunawan, A. Budianto, D. Syahbana, J. Pallister (2017)
Character of community response to volcanic crises at Sinabung and Kelud volcanoes
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research
(2008)
No 21 concerning disaster management
(2015)
Seputar pengalaman belajar bersama komunitas lereng Merapi
Fiqih Astriani, M. Hardjono (2017)
Mitigasi Bencana Gunung Merapi Berbasis Desa Bersaudara (Sister Village) di Kecamatan Musuk Kabupaten Boyolali Jawa Tengah
M. Marmol, K. Fontijn, M. Atanga, S. Njome, G. Mafany, A. Tening, M. Wantim, Beatrice Fonge, V. Che, Aka Festus, G. Ernst, Emmanuel Suh, P. Jacobs, M. Kervyn (2017)
Investigating the Management of Geological Hazards and Risks in the Mt Cameroon Area Using Focus Group Discussions
M. Rahman, Isye Nurhasanah, S. Nugroho (2016)
Community Resilience: Learning from Mt Merapi Eruption 2010
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227
A. Donovan, C. Oppenheimer (2016)
Imagining the Unimaginable: Communicating Extreme Volcanic Risk
(2013)
Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi https:// magma. vsi. esdm. go. id/ index
C. Newhall, R. Solidum (2017)
Volcanic Hazard Communication at Pinatubo from 1991 to 2015
Communication as an effort to disaster risk reduction for society ( in Indonesian )
S. Andreastuti, A. Budianto, E. Paripurno (2017)
Integrating Social and Physical Perspectives of Mitigation Policy and Practice in Indonesia
(2019)
Survei persepsi masyarakat sebagai dasar evaluasi program pelatihan penanggulangan bencana di Kawasan
Vita Elysia, Ake Wihadanto (2018)
The Sister Village Program: Promoting Community Resilience after Merapi Eruption
, 3
A. Chatfield, C. Reddick (2015)
Understanding Risk Communication Gaps through E-Government Website and Twitter Hashtag Content Analyses: The Case of Indonesia’s Mt. Sinabung Eruption
Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 12
(2021)
Moving for safety: a qualitative
J. Gaillard (2008)
Alternative paradigms of volcanic risk perception: The case of Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 172
(2012)
Eruption hazard assessments and warnings
T. Marsh (2013)
Talking Safety: A User's Guide to World Class Safety Conversation
(2008)
No 17 concerning the arrangement of disaster management in certain condition during a volcanic crisis

Publisher: Springer Journals
Copyright: Copyright © The Author(s) 2023
eISSN: 2191-5040
DOI: 10.1186/s13617-023-00129-2
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Volcano disaster risk management during a crisis requires continuous and intensive risk communication with the public. However, to have the desired public response during a crisis, it is necessary to improve the community’s understanding of volcanoes. Knowledge, experience, risk perception, communication, and drills shape good commu- nity responses. These require a bottom-up process of communication and involvement of the community in decision- making and engagement with the government. Thus, proper crisis management requires top-down and bottom-up communication and joint work between the scientists, decision-makers, and the community. The response from the community can be improved through community-based preparedness with a culturally sensitive approach that facilitates a strong relationship and participation of community members according to their customs. The Wajib Latih Penanggulangan Bencana ( WLPB: Compulsory Disaster Management Training Program) and the SISTER VILLAGE Pro- gram in the Merapi Volcano community are good examples of community-based preparation in Indonesia. An effective volcano early warning protocol includes risks analysis, volcano monitoring, hazards analysis and fore - casting, dissemination of alerts and warnings, and community response according to the warning. Alert levels can also be increased during the unrest, so actions are also associated with this and not just related to the impacts of an eruption. Therefore, the alert level alone is not helpful if it is not appropriately communicated with an action plan in place to improve community awareness. Moreover, personal communication between scientists and decision-makers and between scientists and the community is essential to instill self-responsibility and a sense of belonging. Personal communication describes the trust of community members or certain decision-makers to scientists to obtain more detailed explanations of volcanic activity. Such communication is already occurring in communities that have experi- enced a long history of eruptions, and/or continuous eruptions, such as at Merapi and Sinabung volcanoes. The disaster management system in Indonesia includes institutions that manage science and institutions responsible for social aspects, such as evacuations, refugee handling, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA, Badan Nasional Bencana, BNPB in Bahasa Indonesia) of Indonesia coordinates all disas- ters to integrate management of and facilitate communication between stakeholders. In addition to a well-established system, effective and good disaster management needs to be supported by poli- cies related to public needs before, during, and after the disaster. After disasters, a review of previous strategies is also necessary to develop a better strategy and obtain a better result. Establishing SISTER VILLAGES is an excellent strategy *Correspondence: Supriyati D. Andreastuti s7andreastuti@gmail.com Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ publi cdoma in/ zero/1. 0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 2 of 20 to meet the needs during a crisis. However, this needs to be supported by regulations related to collecting data, the evacuation process and facilitation, and infrastructure, communication, and coordination. Here, we present good risk communication practices around Indonesia’s volcanoes related to how people receive and understand early warning information and take action with the support of the government through capacity improvement and learning from experiences. Keywords Volcano, Disaster management, Early warning, WLPB, SISTER VILLAGE, Communication, Coordination, Crisis, Community response, Policy, Strategy review Introduction landslide is the mandate of Ministry of Energy and Min- Volcano disaster risk management is the implementa- eral Resources, through the Centre for Volcanology and tion of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies to Geological Hazard Mitigation (CVGHM), earthquake prevent the disaster risk associated with volcanic activity and tsunami is the mandate of the Meteorological, Cli- (UNISDR). In Indonesia, there are 127 active volcanoes, matological, and Geophysical Agency, (Badan Meteor- of which 77 are classified as Type A, 29 as Type B, and 21 ologi, Klimatologi dan Geofisika BMKG) and others. In as Type C. Type A volcanoes are those classified as very this paper, we discuss the mitigation of volcanic hazard active and have a high probability to erupt (Andreastuti in Indonesia. Here, we present good examples of best et al. 2018). This classification is used to decide the prior - practices of communication between scientists, decision ity level of volcano monitoring. makers and the public through the WLPB and SISTER Volcano disaster risk management during a crisis VILLAGE initiatives at Merapi, Agung and Sinabung. involves a wide range of stakeholders from various sec- tors, including National, Provincial and Local Disaster The importance of capacity building Management Agencies, the Indonesian Army and Police, of communities within hazard zones of volcanoes Transportation, Social, Public Work, and Health Minis- Indonesia, with its large number of volcanoes and a tries. Adequate disaster prevention effort, and disaster high density population living on their slopes, requires management actions during and post disaster need effec - efforts to increase the capacity of communities to deal tive communication channels and understandable infor- with future eruptions. Volcanoes are monitored continu- mation. The manner in which this happens varies a lot ously, however the risks caused by volcano hazards are according to the country, cultures and past experience very dynamic. This is influenced by the development of of volcanic activity (e.g. Martinez-Villegas et al. 2021; residential areas and facilities around active volcanoes, Becker et al. 2018). In Indonesia, in addition to a central which tend to grow near the source of hazards. Efforts and local government and stakeholders, this process also are being made to reduce the risk of volcanic eruptions, involves the local communities. According to law, Disas- through, among other initiatives, strengthening capac- ter Management includes policies for the development of ity of communities so that they are able to respond at disaster risk areas, disaster prevention activities, emer- the time of eruption. This research aims to understand gency response, and rehabilitation. factors involved in risk communication, and the best The implementation of disaster mitigation activi - practices learned during the crisis and how these affect ties is coordinated by the National Disaster Manage- disaster risk management processes. Based on experi- ment Agency (NDMA) (BNPB in Bahasa Indonesia). In ences of previous eruption in several locations of past the event of disaster, the management is coordinated disasters, we improved risk communication within com- by BNPB or Provincial Disaster Management Agency munities through a cultural-based, egalitarian, empa- (PDMA)/Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah thetic approach. To identify problems in communication (BPBD) Provinsi or Regional Disaster Management we also used method of meeting, briefings, workshops, Agency (RDMA)/ Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Dae- and direct interviews with key persons from scientific rah (BPBD) Kabupaten/Kota according to the scale of institutions, disaster management agencies, and local disaster. Determination of Disaster Emergency Status for governments. The result led to the proposal of a social the national level is set by the President, and at provincial system created by the community through Wajib Latih level by the Governor, or Major/Regent in accordance Penanggulangan Bencana (WLPB) and SISTER VIL- with the level of disaster (Presidential Decree Number LAGE and supported by decision-makers. The outcomes 17 Year 2018). Mitigation of each individual hazard is also include an understanding of volcanic hazards and given to Ministry or Agency, i.e. flooding is the mandate of Ministry of Public Works and Housing, volcano and A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 3 of 20 communication and coordination as discussed in the fol- and the public. Besides volcano information, MAGMA lowing sections. Indonesia also provides information related to the miti- gation of landslides, earthquakes, and tsunamis. Informa- Volcano disaster prevention activities tion disseminated through MAGMA Indonesia consists Disaster prevention aims to reduce vulnerability and of scientific information (Volcano Activity Report/VAR, exposure (United Nation Disaster Risk Reduction Volcano Eruption Notice/VEN, Volcano Observation (UNDRR) 2016), and can be carried out for example Notice for Aviation/VONA, Volcano Activity Evaluation through physical mitigation measures or regulation. for volcano above Normal Level), and information for the Disaster prevention activities carried out by CVGHM general public (press releases, educational information, include programs such as volcano monitoring and hazard interactive communications, etc.). assessment, preparation and socializing of volcanic haz- ard maps, dissemination of information including alert Monitoring data collection, processing and information levels through the MAGMA (Multiplatform Application Volcano monitoring data retrieved from the observa- for Geohazard Mitigation and Assessment) Indonesia tories are reported routinely to CVGHM. The report application and website (https:// magma. esdm. go. id), includes the visual and instrumental data the volcanolo- preparation and maintenance of early warning systems, gists will analyze further. The workflow included in the and education. The monitoring activities are carried out process (Fig. 1) involves scientific information about at 69 type-A volcanoes through 74 volcano observatories. the volcano and eruption. This information is evaluated Seventy-one volcanic hazard maps have been distributed and complemented by the geological record and previ- as hard copies to stakeholders and the public. Hazard ous eruptions, hazard maps, hazard modeling, and event maps are also accessible online via the MAGMA Indo- tree analysis. The resulting information is processed nesia application and website. According to the law, a and communicated to stakeholders and public through hazard map is suggested as the basis for spatial planning. the Volcano Alert Level and its recommendation of the Of 77 type A volcanoes, four volcanoes are submarine, potentially affected areas (see Table 1 below for more and the rest are remote volcanoes, those are difficult to details). During a crisis, the hazards map, hazards infor- access. mation, exposure of the potentially affected areas, and Dissemination of volcano information is carried out risk information are communicated to and followed up by through MAGMA Indonesia (https:// magma. vsi. esdm. the BNPB and BPBD. In case of an indication of increas- go. id/ index. php n.d.), which is an application of geo- ing activity, the local BPBD will be contacted directly by a logical disaster information in real-time to stakeholders volcano observer from the respective volcano. Fig. 1 Components of Hazard Assessment during a volcanic crisis. The output of hazard assessment is an alert level and technical recommendation (right). The alert level and recommendation are then applied to threatened community (left) Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 4 of 20 Table 1 Volcano alert level as developed in Indonesia and the linked community response (modified from Andreastuti et al. 2019) Level of Volcanic Activity Indication Community Response Frequency of report Normal Level (I) Visual observations and instrumental records show normal fluctuations Communities in Hazard Zones (HZs) I and II may carry out daily activities. Monthly and no change of activity. Hazards in the form of poisonous gas may be Communities in HZ III may carry out daily activity as long as they are present near vents, depending on the volcano’s characteristic activity in compliance with regulatory requirements from local government according to the technical recommendation of the Geological Agency, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Waspada Level (II, Advisory) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I and II may carry out their normal activities, but Biweekly indications of increasing volcanic activity must keep alert. For communities in HZ III it is recommended that they do not carry out daily activities in areas near summit craters or other vents Siaga Level (III, Watch) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I should improve their awareness and must not Daily prominent indications of increasing volcanic activity. Eruptions may take carry out activities along river valleys that originate at or near the place, but do not threaten settlements and/or activities of communities volcano’s summit near the volcano Communities in HZ II should start to prepare for evacuation and await an evacuation order from the local government according to the techni- cal recommendation of the Geological Agency, Ministry Energy and Mineral Resources. Community in HZ III are not permitted to carry out daily activities and should prepare to evacuate Awas Level (IV, Warning) According to visual observations and instrumental records, there are Communities in HZ I, II, and III are to immediately to evacuate by the Every 6 h significant indications of ongoing volcanic activity, with eruptions order of local government, according to technical that potentially threaten settlements and or communities around the recommendation from Geological Agency, Ministry Energy and Mineral volcano Resources A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 5 of 20 Indonesia volcano alert level This communication is followed by activities of warning Based on Andreastuti et al. (2018), a volcano alert level to the relevant stakeholders and communities, intensive is the level of the hazard potential of volcanic activity at communication with the community at risk, review of a a particular time. Indonesia uses a scale with four alert contingency plan, community exercise and evacuation levels, from the lowest to the highest: Normal (Level I), drill. During a crisis, the community with their capacity Waspada (Advisory; Level II), Siaga (Watch, Level III), is challenged to take proper response or action according and Awas (Warning, Level IV). The volcano alert levels to hazard information and level of activity, because their are applicable for all monitored volcanoes. In Indonesia, action depends on several factors such as psychological the alert levels have been implemented since 1996 (Direk- condition, leadership and preparedness culture which is torat Vulkanologi, 1996). The volcano alert levels and built during evacuation drills. their recommendations are sent to stakeholders, such as NDMA (BNPB), PDMA (BPBD Provinsi), and RDMA An integrated disaster risk management system (BPBD Kabupaten/Kota), where the potential volcanic in Indonesia hazards are located. Alert levels are also disseminated An integrated Disaster Risk Management System is a to the public through the MAGMA Indonesia applica- series of activities related to disaster risk mitigation tion and website. The report dissemination frequency is involving a multi-stakeholder (PentaHelix), multi-disci- monthly, biweekly, daily, and every 6 h, depending on the plinary approach, across different levels of government, alert levels. The higher the volcano alert level, the higher global, regional, national, local, and individual efforts. the reporting frequency. The implementation of volcano These activities are in accordance with the four priori - alert levels as part of an early warning system in Indone- ties of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduc- sia describes the potential impact of volcanic behavior on tion (SFDRR) 2015–2030 n.d., namely (i) Understanding nearby communities, as shown by exclusion zones. This disaster risk; (ii) Strengthening disaster risk governance is also supported by community capacity as communi- to manage disaster risk; (iii) Investing in disaster reduc- ties are involved in the implementation of actions dur- tion for resilience and; (iv) Enhancing disaster prepared- ing volcanic crises and eruptions according to alert level ness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in (Andreastuti et al. 2018). recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The Merapi volcano community has implemented a WLPB is a program implemented in Merapi since 2016, community-based early warning system through Wajib initiated by the Merapi Forum. It is a multi-stakeholder Latih Penanggulangan Bencana (Compulsory Disas- forum across four regencies in Central Java (Magelang, ter Management Training Program, WLPB) (Rahman, Boyolali, and Klaten Regencies) and Yogyakarta (Sleman et al. 2016). This program has been implemented for Regency) Provinces for handling the Mount Merapi risk. people living in HZ III around Merapi during Nor- The forum was established in 2007. The activities repre - mal (Level I), since 2016. The main core of WLPB is to sent the four priorities of SFDRR and aim to encourage strengthen community capacity through knowledge collaboration between residents on the slopes of Merapi improvement and community skills to be able to iden- and stakeholders such as the government (including tify safe places, carry out rescues, and be independent CVGHM), media, private sector, and donor agencies. The (Indonesia National Standard no 8039 2018). The sys - forum’s goal is both to reduce the risk associated with an tem was also implemented in the Kelud (Paripurno and eruption at Merapi Volcano and to manage its natural Nugroho 2018) and Agung communities (https:// mmb. resources. The WLPB aims to improve knowledge and upn yk . ac . id/ b er it a/ p enin g k a t an- k a p a s it a s - ma s y a rak a t- community skill in disaster risk management and is part gunung- agung n.d.). It includes four key elements: 1) risk of Community-based Disaster Risk Management. The knowledge, 2) monitoring as well as hazard assessment substance of the WLPB program includes (1) basic dis- and forecasting of the hazards, 3) communication or dis- aster management, (2) hazard character assessment, (3) semination of alerts and warnings, and 4) community risk assessment, (4) inclusive early warning, and (5) evac- response, as mentioned in United Nations International uation planning. WLPB has been implemented at volca- Strategy for Disaster Reduction, UNISDR (2009). There - noes such as Merapi, Kelut, Bromo, Semeru (Adi et al. in fore, alert level information is only useful if it is under- Paripurno ed. 2015) and Agung. stood by the community and stakeholders. Another form of Community-based Disaster Risk Communicating scientific information and advice to Management is the SISTER VILLAGE program, which decision makers should include several requirements has started to be implemented at several volcanoes in such as clear, acceptable and understandable informa- Indonesia, such as Merapi, Kelud, Agung, and Sinabung. tion with a description and type of hazard potential, as SISTER VILLAGE is a program in which a village located well as the possible magnitude and likely area affected. in a High Hazard Zone (Hazard Zone III) is paired with Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 6 of 20 a safe village outside the hazard zone for the emergency capacity (UNDRR 2016) of people in their normal lives. plan (Mei 2013), including an evacuation place (Astri- Based on Erfurt-Cooper (2018), vulnerability can be a ani 2017). According to the BPBD of Magelang Regency result of people being unaware or ignoring the potential (2016) in Elysia and Widahanto (2018), the creation risk while visiting an unsafe place. An extreme example of a SISTER VILLAGE considers the close relation- was the eruption of Sinabung Volcano, Indonesia on 1 ship between the two villages, the readiness of the part- February 2014. The eruption occurred at 10:30 am local ner village, accessibility, potential for development and time, produced pyroclastic flows which extended up to sustainability, and security. This concept prioritizes com - 4.5 km. Sixteen people from outside the areas entered the munication and coordination to meet needs and sustain- exclusion zone up to 3 km from the summit in the south able development in the face of future volcanic eruptions. flank at Sukameriah Village and all of them died because The rapid growth and expansion of population in a of pyroclastic flows. By that time, it was prohibited to country with a high number of volcanoes such as Indo- enter exclusion zone up to 5 km radius from the summit nesia can have an effect on livelihood and social hard - to the south (Andreastuti et al. 2019). ship and even political complexity. According to Gaillard In terms of the two views mentioned above (Gail- (2008), there are two views on how people respond to lard 2008), even though the Sinabung eruption was not volcanic hazards. One considers mainly the volcanic extreme, it highlights two examples of cultural degrada- phenomena and associated risk, and the other takes into tion and political intervention through social media dur- account the economic, social and political aspects. Bridg- ing a crisis. ing between the two views is even more complicated in The first example relates to the involvement of vol - disaster management, although cooperation between the unteers to help prepare meals for evacuees during the various stakeholders can address the problem and facili- Sinabung crisis, which disturbed the local customs tate better communication. The NDMA (BNPB) is the because the local people could no longer participate coordinator for disaster management in Indonesia and (Andreastuti et al. 2019). In the evacuation place, when can handle and facilitate the communication between a community stays in a jamhur (local building for people stakeholders, as it is the recognized agency in disaster gathering) of another village, the host village will prepare management (see Fig. 2). a meal for several days. After that, the evacuees will take Disaster is a complex mix of natural hazards and turns filling their needs. However, the involvement of human action (Wisner et al. 2014, UNDRR, 2016); there- people from outside disrupted this custom, affecting the fore, disasters are a consequence of hazardous events character of the evacuation place. interacting with conditions of exposure, vulnerability and Fig. 2 Disaster Management structure in Indonesia and the implementation agency (Presidential Decree Number 8 Year 2008). BNPB in the left panel, and the implementing agencies at national level (right panel) A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 7 of 20 The second example relates to the refusal of SBY CVGHM is under the Ministry of Energy and Mineral (Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the Indonesia President, Resources, Geological Agency, with the mandate to pro- 2004–2014) to declare Sinabung as a national disaster, vide technical recommendations and volcano early warn- provoking public outrage against his social media pres- ing to BNPB and BPBD. Therefore, alert level information ence (#unfollowSBY). This was an indicator of declining and recommendation are sent to BNPB and BPBD regu- external political efficacy based on government responses larly according to the location of volcanoes. (Parent et al. 2005, in Chatfield and Reddick 2015). The The system of decision making in Indonesia’s volcano decision meant that that the local government could not disaster mitigation has a clear separation between insti- receive the aid of the central government for the affected tutions that have a mandate to handle mitigation in the villagers. Even though, according to the impact of the field of science (CVGHM), and the institution that is Sinabung eruption, it was classified as a local disaster, responsible for the social aspects of the disaster i.e., evac- in other words did not meet the requirements to receive uating the population (BNPB, Coordinated Ministry of assistance from the central government (Presidential Human Development and Culture, Ministry of Finance, Decree Number 17 Year 2018). Ministry of Transportation, Indonesian Army and Indo- The dense population combined with the needs for nesian Police), facilitating refugees (BNPB, Coordinated livelihoods force people living in the vicinity of a volcano Ministry of Human Development and Culture, Ministry to move closer to the source of the hazard. Therefore, the of Social Affairs, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Finance), risk increases due to higher exposure. To reduce volcanic conducting rehabilitation and reconstruction (BNPB, disaster risk, it requires not only to understand the vol- Coordinated Ministry of Human Development and Cul- cano and its processes, but also to prepare the commu- ture, Ministry of Public Work and Housing, Ministry of nity in anticipation of the event. Home Affairs, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, The structure of disaster management in Indonesia Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning, Indonesian Army contains a disaster committee and implementing agencies and Indonesian Police) (Table 2). Each level of disaster (Fig. 2). The committee consists of 9 people from the pro - management agency is supported by implementing agen- fessional community who are appointed by the respective cies according to the level. For its activities, BNPB is sup- Local Government based on the proposal of BPBD. The ported by 11 institutions at the ministry level, including implementing agency covers ten ministries and agencies. the Coordinated Ministry of Human Development and Table 2 Summary of decision-making agency/ministry in handling volcano disaster mitigation in Indonesia Agency/Ministry Science Information Social Evacuation Facilitating Rehabilitation refugees and reconstruction National Disaster Management Agency v v v Coordinated Ministry of Human Develop- v v v ment and Culture Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources v v ( Through the Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation) Ministry of Finance v v v Ministry of Transportation v Ministry of Information and Informatics v Ministry of Social Affairs v Ministry of Education v Ministry of Health v Ministry of Public Work and Housing v National Search and Rescue Agency v Indonesian Red Cross v v Ministry of Home Affairs, v v Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning v Indonesian Army v v Indonesian Police v v Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 8 of 20 Culture, the Ministry of Land and Spatial Planning, the alert level, hazards potential and potential threatened Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of Health, the areas. Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Public Work and It is important to build long-standing relationships Housing, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry between scientists, stakeholders and the community of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral to communicate volcanic hazard. The communica - Resources, the Indonesian Army, and the Indonesian tion should start early on, during the preparedness time Police (Fig. 2). (Komorowski et al. 2018). Preparedness in anticipating In Indonesia, there are regulations that apply to disas- volcanic hazard includes preparation of hazard infor- ters because of their association with social, economic mation, including the type of hazard, hazard potential, and livelihood of the community. Disaster management potential threats, means of socialization, formulation of is therefore the responsible of all parties. a contingency plan, understanding the evacuation pro- cess, community exercises including evacuation drills, Communication Table-top exercises for disaster management officials Communicating hazard information is a full-time con- and Command Post Exercise following the formulation suming process, as the interaction between community of contingency plans. During the process of capacity (social) and scientists (physical perspectives) and disas- improvement in the preparedness stage, fostering com- ter management agencies (policy and practice) requires munication and networking between individuals and equity in hazard perception (Andreastuti et al. 2018). A groups encourages the development of trust. A clear shared understanding of hazard leads to understanding example is the formulation of contingency plans. In the the needs and how to meet them, and this is therefore a process of capacity building, taking different cultures key component of risk communication. into account is an important aspect in communication According to Fearnley and Beaven (2018), communi- and in understanding hazard (Gabrielsen et al. 2018, cation between scientists and decision makers depends Andreastuti et al. 2018, Marsh 2014, Bignami et al. 2012). on credibility of information, needs of the groups, and Lowenstern et al. (2022) proposed that scientists need to appropriateness of information and communication pro- understand local conditions, social cultures and priori- cesses. Credibility of information is challenged by evi- ties). The role of culture in Indonesia varies from place to dence of past experience, availability of data, and source place. According to Balasubramanian (2018), the estab- of information. Therefore, the time needed for commu - lishment of a culture is supported by geography. Culture nicating the risk depends on many factors: experience, and geography are connected in the way that culture rep- data, the means to communicate, and trust. Establishing resents the characteristic of people within an area. This a two-way communication process and dialogue is better is why, for example, religion and languages are different than just providing information (Stewart et al. 2018). in many places and how other identities of culture are Recent developments in communication technology produced. Therefore, the wide distribution of volcanoes have influenced the means of communication between across areas with different community cultures in Indo - stakeholders. Beside using fax, telephone, text mes- nesia necessitates a range of communication approaches sages, communication is also carried out through specific according to local culture. WhatsApp Groups (WAG), e.g. Pastigana (Pusat Analisis Here, we present good practices from Merapi, Agung Situasi Siaga Bencana, Center for Disaster Alert Situation and Sinabung in relation to evacuation and local culture. Analysis, owned by BNPB), Info Kebencanaan Geologi (Geological Disaster Information, CVGHM), and locally Merapi Diseminasi Penanggulangan Bencana Jawa Barat (Dis- Referring to Mei et al. (2013), there were total of 24,024 semination of West Java Disaster Management, West Java people from 12 villages within hazard zone III that were Province). evacuated on 26 October 2010, according to CVGHM The advantage of having these restricted but efficient recommendation. These villages are Purwobinangun, groups for communication, is that stakeholders involved Wonokerto, Girikerto, Hargobinangun, Umbulharjo, can share the information according to their mandate, Kepuharjo, Glagaharjo and Kaliurang Villages (Sle- and can also more effectively ask for information needed man Regency); Balerante, Sidorejo, and Tegalmulyo Vil- from other stakeholders. Communications with the lages (Klaten Regency); and Kemiren Village (Magelang decision maker is done also through regular meetings, Regency). workshops or informal meetings. In the case of crises, Here, we took lessons learned from Deles Hamlet, communication can be carried out both through regular Sidorejo Village (4 km from the Merapi summit to the meetings and anytime needed. It includes communica- southeast), Fig. 3. During the Merapi eruption in 2010, tion on a briefing sheet, explanations of exclusion zone, the head of Deles Hamlet took the initiative to evacuate A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 9 of 20 Fig. 3 Hazard map of Merapi Volcano (updated after the 2010 eruption). Red, pink and yellow colors on the map describe the Hazard Zone III (the highest), II (moderate) and I (the lowest). Dashed yellow, pink and red circle lines represent 10 km, 15 km and 20 km exclusion zones during the 2010 crisis. Blue solid lines showed the route of evacuation from Deles Hamlet to Manjung, and from Balerante to Kebondalem Village Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 10 of 20 his citizens to Kemalang District on 26 October 2010, unnecessary independent evacuation of the community one day after the level was raised to Level IV (Pramono during the crisis. A strategy to involve the community 2012), and livestock was evacuated on 27 October 2010 and religious leaders in public communication had an to the same place. The evacuation of the population was important role in improving trust in CVGHM (Syahbana completely managed shortly before an eruption hit Kalia- et al. 2019). dem Village in the south of Merapi, where ’Mbah Mari- For some people in the Mt. Agung community, the jan’, the volcano gatekeeper of Merapi was one of the 1963 large eruption left a deep trauma because of the casualties. When the eruption was getting bigger, and all wide impact, especially on the community around the evacuees needed to move outside a 20 km radius from volcano. It was a violent (Volcano Explosivity Index, VEI the summit, people from Deles Hamlet and Petung Vil- 5) eruption, and the eruption products and subsequent lage were reluctant to go without their livestock. Finally, lahar were distributed to the north, southeast, and south- they headed to Manjung Village (21 km from Merapi west resulting in more than 1000 fatalities (Global Vol- summit) with their livestock and lived there until the canism Program, GVP). activity of Merapi was back to normal. In fact, on the way During the 2017 – 2019 crisis, the total number of to Manjung, several villages were passed, but they could evacuees during the crisis reached 70,967 people dis- not accept them because the evacuees brought their live- tributed into 240 evacuation points (BPBD Provinsi stock with them during their evacuation, and the villages Bali). The process of evacuations was organized by the they passed were not able to provide facilities, because local government, but there were also independent livestock need mainly space, food, and water. During evacuations carried out by the community. During these their stay, all activities and facilities were coordinated by independent evacuation processes, people considered the head of Manjung Village. This independent evacua - kinship, customary similarities (e.g., languages, habits), tion is currently known as SISTER VILLAGE and rep- and past eruption experiences (Bagiarta, personal com- resents a good example of the two-way communication munication). Those people who experienced the 1963 process, and how dialogue can result in a better outcome eruption and their families went to the same place dur- for disaster risk mitigation. ing the 2017–2019 crisis, such as from Geriana Kauh to During the 2010 Merapi crisis, people from Balerante Gunaksa Village, in the southwest – west or from Pucang Village (about 5 km from Merapi summit to the south) to Tejakula or to Bondalem in north east—north. The were evacuated since 26 October 2010. At that time, long-distance journey to the final destination is due to the there was one person who stayed in the village and did experience of the 1963 eruption during which the impact not want to evacuate who then finally died because of did not reach these places. This experience reflects that pyroclastic flows from the 5 November 2010, the peak oral tradition occurred within the community. Figure 4 of Merapi eruptions. This village was partly affected by shows the examples of long evacuation routes because the eruption; therefore, people from the unaffected vil - they avoided hilly areas and roads that were difficult to lage were still going back and forth to their village to access. take care of their livestock. Learning from this experi- ence, since 2012 the community has been preparing a Sinabung volcano livestock evacuation to support people’s evacuation in On August 10, 2010, a phreatic eruption occurred at the case of a Merapi eruption in the future. This program Sinabung volcano after about 1200 years of dormancy was executed due to the reluctance of residents to evacu- (Prambada et al. 2010). The activity has been continuing ate because they were encouraged to leave their livestock and increasingly intensive. In 2013, lava flows began to at their homes during the 2010 eruption. Therefore, the appear and lasted about three years (Nakada et al. 2017). community has been preparing for the Temporary and Currently, the activity of Mount Sinabung is relatively Final Livestock Evacuation located about 5 km at Baler- low (at the time of writing this article, at the Alert Level ante Village, Kemalang District, Klaten Regency, and II). At the beginning of the activity, the knowledge and 7 km from the summit at Kebondalem, Prambanan Dis- response of the community to anticipate the eruption trict, Klaten Regency (Fig. 3). were still lacking due to the volcano’s long repose time. The increasing activity from August 2010 to 2014 Agung volcano resulted in the impact of pyroclastic flow on southern The volcanic crisis at Mount Agung occurred in 2017– flank villages, such as Sukameriah, Bekerah, and Simacem 2019 after more than 50 years of dormancy. Insufficient villages. Sukameriah was the first village impacted by knowledge and false information stating that an eruption pyroclastic flows. During their evacuation, there were was imminent resulted in inappropriate response and similar routes taken by the Sukameriah people. The route A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 11 of 20 Fig. 4 Map showing the distribution of eruption products and subsequent lahar of Agung to north, southeast and southwest flank (GVP, Syahbana et al. 2019). Solid and dashed circle lines showed the exclusion zones during the 2017–2019 crisis (Syahbana et al. 2019). Light blue and purple solid lines are the evacuation routes considering people’s experience from the 1963 eruption. Yellow and light green areas indicate the few locations of casualties due to the 1963 eruption was to Gukinayan Village, and in case the eruption was implies a lack of understanding of hazard and its risk. getting bigger, they moved further to Sipayung Village In response to Sinabung activity, capacity improve- (Fig. 5). ment of the Sinabung community has been carried From 2010 to 2015, in most cases, the Sinabung out, and it is still in progress. Several efforts have been community managed to evacuate after an eruption done including formulation of a contingency plan for occurred, which was represented by the number of eruption and lahar, evacuation drills, training for vol- evacuees during the Sinabung crisis (https:// web. karok cano facilitators and preparation of disaster resilience ab. go. id/ profi le/ illus trati on- umum). This situation villages. Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 12 of 20 Fig. 5 a (left). Hazard Map of Sinabung (Gunawan 2013). The 2014 PDC was produced at the beginning of magmatic activity (light purple color). Red, pink and yellow color represent Hazard Zone III (the highest), Hazard Zone II (moderate) and Hazard Zone I (the lowest). Dashed red, pink and yellow circles represent areas affected by fall deposits. Long red dashed circle indicates is the exclusion zone (3 km radius). Evacuation route from Sukameriah to Gurukinayan to Sipayung villages is shown in black solid lines. b (right) describes the progress of PDC distribution from 2014 to 2018 Discussion positive outcomes by consensus and mutual deliberation Indonesia is a country prone to geological disasters, (Effendi 2013). The examples of evacuation processes in including volcanic eruptions. In 2022, there were about Merapi, Agung and Sinabung also reflect the importance ten eruptions that occurred per month (CHGHM Inter- of Gotong royong within the community. Communica- nal report 2022). The frequent occurrence of volcanic tion and coordination were carried out before, during eruptions from different volcanoes provides a unique and after the process of evacuation in informal, egalitar- opportunity to learn lessons, not only from the scien- ian, and emphatic manners. The nature of residents who tific point of view itself but also from the characteristics have the intention of helping each other causes residents and behaviours of communities surrounding each indi- who live on the lower slopes (e.g. Manjung Village, Mer- vidual volcano. The response of community from Merapi, api Volcano; Tejakula Village, Agung Volcano; Sipayung Agung and Sinabung volcanoes to alert level information Village, Sinabung Volcano) to help residents from the and how they took action reflected different capacity and upper slopes (Deles Hamlet, Merapi Volcano; Pucang, disaster experience of the community. However, all of Agung Volcano; Sukameriah, Sinabung Volcano); this them implemented communication according local cul- was implemented in the evacuation process. The activi - ture, such as in finding a suitable village as an evacuation ties of Gotong royong reflect social capital that prioritizes site. common interests. Social capital also incorporates trust Kinship is the dominant factor in culture commu- (Fukuyama 1995) and the value of social networks. In a nication in order to find better solutions mainly dur - society with a strong tradition, communication to decide ing difficult times such as in a volcanic crisis. The word important issues usually uses consensus and deliberation, of Gotong royong (mutual cooperation) is part of local whether the communication is between the members of wisdom that has been developed as a heritage in Indo- the community, or between informal and formal lead- nesia, to be implemented within communities to obtain ers. This approach has also been implemented in disaster A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 13 of 20 mitigation to improve capacity building of communi- in a contingency plan. The stakeholders involved in an ties and has led to increased preparedness and resilience Emergency Alert and Emergency Response can be seen (Andreastuti et al. 2019). Consensual and deliberation in Fig. 2. approaches have also been used by the Popocatépetl The community’s need and resources for potential evac - Scientific Committee in assessing the activity of Pop - uation (level III), is calculated based on recommendations ocatépetl (de la Cruz-Reyna 2018). Moreover, improved of the Exclusion Zone on the hazard map. For example, awareness also occurs with updated and continuous in Fig. 6, the potential direction of the eruption products information mainly during crisis and non-crisis (De la and the threatened area, illustrates the number of people Cruz-Reyna et al. 2018). in the potentially affected area. These needs are described Disaster experiences of communities are also a contrib- in the contingency plan of Sinabung. The hazard map is uting factor to take action in response to volcanic erup- commonly presented in increasing detail according to the tion. The main problem for communities when it comes current potential hazard and the progress of activity (e.g., to evacuate is the unwillingness to leave their belongings, development of sector-specific pyroclastic flows, such as namely livestock and plantations, therefore, some peo- in Sinabung, see Fig. 6). Maps are commonly adjusted as ple who stayed in the shelter wanted to go back to their a crisis progresses, such as at Merapi (Lavigne et al. 2018). village to check their possessions. Evacuation of Merapi The current hazard potential can be seen from the communities during the crisis had been encouraged by exclusion zone (red dashed line) and the possible local government, however due to no facilitation for live- threatened villages can be identified, and the needs and stock evacuation, the Deles people initiate an independ- resources estimated, for contingency planning. The con - ent evacuation that included their livestock. On the other tingency plan is formulated by stakeholders with the hand, the experience of the large eruption of Agung com- involvement of the community. This is a good strategy munity in 1963 resulted in some people displaced to the to strengthen the capacity of the community in decision same villages during the volcanic crisis in 2017–2019. making. Strengthening the community capacity using a Figure 4 shows the distribution of deposits from the 1963 bottom-up approach (e.g., Andreastuti et al. 2018) can- eruption. That area was safe from the effects of the 1963 not work smoothly without the support of the govern- eruption (e.g. the displacement from Pucang to Tejakula ment officials (top down) (Cadag et al. 2018, Lavigne and Bondalem Villages, at the north east of Agung). Simi- et al. 2018). According to the Law of the Republic Indo- larly, the Sinabung community followed the same paths nesia Number 24 Year 2007, concerning Disaster Man- when an eruption was getting bigger and an evacuation agement and Government Regulation No 21 Year 2008, needed. Evacuation being repeatedly carried out from Government and Local Government shall have Disas- Sukameriah to Gurukinayan and to Sipayung Villages ter Management Plans which are updated every five indicates kinship and good communication between years. The Disaster Management Plan is integrated with those villages. National Development Plans. Formulation of Disaster In Indonesia, the alert level includes the relations and Management Plans is coordinated by Disaster Manage- communication of the different actors involved and com - ment Agency according to the level (National, Provincial, munity preparedness during volcanic crisis (Andreas- Local). It includes recognition and evaluation of disaster tuti et. al. 2018, p.309, p.318). As alert level III issued by threat, vulnerability, evaluation of disaster impact, risk CVGHM and is informed to BNPB and BPBD, they will analysis and education, mechanism of preparedness and follow up the information by coordinating stakehold- management on disaster impact. ers to prepare for the need and facilities, such as evacu- Experience of volcanic crisis has proven to influence ation and preparation of shelter, etc. According to the hazard perception and to improve the awareness of the Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic Number community (Andreastuti et al. 2018, McKee et. al. 2018), 17 Year 2018, disaster emergency status includes Siaga and has led to independent evacuation. As an example, Darurat (Emergency Alert), Tanggap Darurat (Emer- before the Kelud eruption on 13 February 2014 at 22:50, gency Response), dan Transisi Darurat ke Pemulihan the Kelud community evacuated independently due (Emergency Transition to Recovery). Communication to high autonomy and participation of the community between stakeholders and preparation of communities is (Sudarmanto, 2020). Part of the communication amongst started at Emergency Alert when CVGHM issues Alert people around Kelud was through radio communication Level III. In Level IV, BNPB/BPBD will activate the con- and informal socialization (Lestari et al. 2017). This activ - tingency plan and order the evacuation. Each alert level ity was carried out willingly by the community mem- is associated with an activity of the community, which bers and coordinated by official leaders (Sub-District represent the needs and resources that shall be provided Chief of Ngancar) (Nugroho et al. 2015). The use of local Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 14 of 20 Fig. 6 Hazard map of Sinabung (Gunawan et al. 2015). The current hazard potential (exclusion zones) is shown by sectoral distance in each sector, represented by red dashed lines. Color Symbols: red is Hazard Zone III (highest), pink is Hazard Zone II (medium) and yellow is Hazard Zone I (lowest) radio stations to facilitate interactive communication In Indonesia, these ‘volcano watchers’ exist at volcanoes was also successfully used at Mt Cameroon (del Marmol that have experienced eruptions in the past. et al. 2018). Improvement of the capacity of the community occurs with their participation and the role of local leader. On Learning from good communication the other hand, participation can also be used to identify Communication with the decision makers can be via for- problems within the community, such as ‘actual’ level mal and/or informal ways. Sometimes direct personal of knowledge, capacity and their understanding of haz- communication is more effective, especially during crisis ard. According to Cadag et. al (2018) participation will times (Newhall and Solidum 2018). A valuable learning encourage communities to empower and build dialogue. experience of this occurred during the activity of Mer- In this way, participatory risk management involving api in 2010. The personal involvement of the Governor community leaders and the population is most appropri- of Jogjakarta to displace people due to the extension of ate to bridge between traditional practices, local realities, exclusion zone from 10 to 15 km resulted in a much more and the implementation of risk management policies and organized and faster evacuation of Merapi community strategies (Lavigne et al. 2018). because of the order of decision maker (Sayudi, personal Cronin et al. (2004), used the method of participa- communication 2019). tion (Participatory Rural Approach, PRA) on Ambae Personal communication can also be implemented Island, Vanuatu, to identify problems of the local com- through the local community as ‘volcano watchers’ such munity through traditional knowledge. These problems as in Sinabung, Merapi, and Kelud. People from the include volcanic hazards visualization, communication community can play a role as photographers (Fig. 7), systems, gender and hierarchy conflicts. Andreastuti journalists, or by providing information to CVGHM et al. (2019) proposed that communication and partici- about anomalies in activity or changes in morphology. pation of the community can be improved through the A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 15 of 20 Fig. 7 Morphology of Sinabung summit before and after the 13 May 2021 eruption. Photos taken by CVGHM staff (left) and by ‘volcano watcher’ Sugeng Nuryono (Maz Yons, right) characteristics of the community as represented by cul- 1) observing the disaster characteristics, ture, disaster experience, local capacity and vulnerability, 2) analyzing the data of observation results, and supported by the presence of local leaders, and social 3) making decisions based on analysis results, networking. However, Miles et al. (2018) argued that 4) dissemination of decision results, and experience of disaster is significant in shaping the behav - 5) taking action by the community. ior of disaster managers, and that risk communication can shape community resilience and non-compliance This describes the span of process from science infor - of the community, as reported from experiences at Mt mation, decision making and implementation to the com- Cameroon volcano. munity. The Volcano Alert Level is part of early warning Another manner of personal communication is through and the result of the first three activities. WAG. This is different from WAG mentioned before, For proper implementation of a scale of volcanic activ- which are at national and provincial level. Some WAGs ity in each country, in addition to the scientific aspects, are composed of decision makers of local districts, local it is necessary to also take into consideration the existing heads of police, Regional Disaster Management Agency systems or regulations applicable in the given country. (such as Sinabung, Kelimutu, Iya), which is owned by The character of each individual volcano has a big influ - Sinabung, Kelimutu and Iya Observatory Posts. Kelimutu ence on the determination of the alert level. In countries and Iya are examples of volcanoes in East Nusa Tenggara with a high number of volcanoes such as Indonesia, a that at the time of writing are at Normal level I, but have general definition of alert levels is more applicable. already established communication with local stakehold- In Indonesia, the aims of having an alert level system ers from government institutions, including the Regional are to communicate volcano hazard information and to Disaster Management Agency, and local and cultural provide recommendations for decision making, stake- leaders. holders, and the community, as well as to prepare action plans depending on the state of volcanic activity. Accord- ing to Papale (2017), the alert level is used by volcan- Communication of volcano alert level ologists to communicate the condition or state of the According to the Presidential Decree of Indonesia Num- volcano. He also highlighted that such system did not ber 8 Year 2008 concerning National Disaster Manage- have a predictive capacity, and that it did not include ment Agency, Early Warning activities include: Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 16 of 20 the confidence levels of the knowledge of volcanolo - by evaluation of activity of volcanoes above normal level. gist according to the alert level. The skill and knowledge The involvement of stakeholders is carried out during of volcanologists are important, but other parameters the formulation of a contingency plan. At the end of the also need to be considered, not only scientific, and also activity, this is tested by simulations (TTX, Table-top the importance of how it is communicated to the deci- Exercise). sion maker and community. As it is mentioned above, the In the case of crisis, the eruption scenario is only shared alert level is not useful if it is not properly communicated among limited people (e.g. Incident Commander/IC and to the stakeholders and public, and if it does not include key stakeholders/local government, BNPB and BPBD). an action plan to improve the awareness of community. During a crisis, several scenarios are prepared and the IC Fearnley and Beaven (2018) emphasized the importance needs to know all scenarios in order to arrange needs and of communication between scientists and stakeholders resources in the event of an eruption. Each scenario is to ensure that the information and its processes are valid developed according to the estimated activity based on a and acceptable by all involved. hazard assessment. However, only general information is A good example of the importance of and successful shared with the public, including the least technical data, use of an alert level system was in the eruption of Pina- in order to minimize confusion. If the eruption scenario tubo in 1991 (Punongbayan et al. 2012, Newhall and changes, this information will be shared with the public, Solidum 2018). The alert level system was able to pro - complemented by a directive recommendation. Each sce- vide simplified information according to the level of vol - nario reflects the intensity of the eruption and different canic activity that was able to address a large and diverse areas of potential hazards and is therefore related to the population, with various degrees of knowledge of hazard. plan of action led by the IC. Taking into account the case examples of Indonesia and A well-established alert system may also reduce a the Philippines, we find that the alert level is a suitable biased interpretation, and as well as increase the speed system to use in case of increasing of volcanic activity. and accuracy of information. When the level of activity Papale (2017) notes that alert level tables are dominantly is provided by agencies that are not involved in moni- developed and used through an ‘intuitive approach’, rather toring, in addition to possible interpretations of the than through rational thinking that should drive scientific volcano status, it will take longer to make decisions evaluations. and thus increasing the risk of the threatened commu- Referring to above quotation, an alert level is a simple nity. The main point of communicating the alert level form of communication between scientists, stakehold- during times of high activity is to provide recommen- ers and the general public that aims to provide directive dations and a strategy to minimize casualties within a information that makes people understand what to do short time frame. This communication is challenged by without having to make their own interpretation. People technical needs, bureaucracy, the time frame, compet- can have different perceptions about probability percent - ing agencies, and trust. These parameters may hinder ages even if it is more logical from volcanologists’ points the process. Sophisticated language and delicate sci- of view. For example, during the 2015 Raung volcano ence need to be avoided during communication to deci- crisis, CVGHM issued recommendation of 3 km exclu- sion makers. At the end, the decision maker only needs sion zone. However, local BPBD (Jember, Banyuwangi to know the trusted and relevant outcome and to act and Bondowoso Regencies) were influenced by the opin - according to the result. ion of independent research institutions, which cannot be scientifically justified. They prepared a contingency Community preparedness and response plan with a 20 km radius of exclusion zone. This situation Risk communication in Indonesia is not only the respon- mislead the community and caused a chaotic situation. sibility of the Government, but also the task of disaster For this reason BNPB forced BPBD to resolve the issue management agency, private sector agencies, and the by following the CVGHM recommendation. Alert levels community. Therefore, capacity building of all groups is are qualitative in nature but are inferred from quantita- important. Cooperation from various sectors is necessary tive analysis of scientific monitoring data. Determination to achieve effective and optimal disaster mitigation. of eruption probabilities requires experience and careful consideration, including educational level and cultural A communication gap between the scientists, decision factors in a particular area. makers, and the community Information of an alert level and its associated recom- Why is there a gap of communication between the sci- mendations is given regularly to stakeholders according entists and the community? The gap exists mainly due to the volcanic activities (Table 1). It is complemented to the level of knowledge related to volcano hazard. An A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 17 of 20 example was found in the Sinabung community at the Conclusion beginning of activity in 2010 – 2012. A gap between sci- The system of volcano alert levels used in Indonesia entists and decision makers was identified, as the deci - describes the potential impact of the volcanic behavior to sion makers responded slowly, did not understand the the surrounding communities, including the exclusion time pressure and urgency of needs during a crisis. This zones, potentially threatened areas, and actions that need happened in Sinabung, North Sumatera and the 2013 to be taken. Communication of volcano hazards to stake- Egon eruption in East Nusa Tenggara. In the Egon com- holders and the community is critical for planning meas- munity, most people wanted to evacuate without con- ures and for action to be taken. The alert level system alone sidering whether they did or did not live in the hazard is not useful if it is not communicated and followed by an zone. action plan to improve the awareness of the community. The communication gap can relate to the question: This can be carried out through community-based prepar - how to convey proper and understandable information? edness activities. Community-based preparedness includes There are two main ways to think about how to better using a culture-based approach, facilitating strong rela- convey information. The social scientist can learn about tionships and participation as the community learns and the volcano and translate the information to the com- improves its capacity according to its customs. munity, or the volcanologist learns how to communicate Previous experience shows the need to protect live- with the decision makers and the community. According stock without compromising personal safety, encourag- to Leonard and Potter (2015), the incorporation of social ing the community to take the initiative to innovate risk science and volcano information can be effectively used reduction and better evacuation planning. to lessen the risk of volcanic hazards to society. On the Independent evacuation of the Deles community in other hand, Marty (2015) proposed that direct commu- Merapi and the Kelud community reflect a strong rela - nication between scientist and public is able to influence tionship and leadership that is able to see the needs of the risk perception and the public confidence. Commu - the citizens and make the right decisions to save lives. nicating risk to a threatened community by both social The important key to self-evacuation compared to being scientists and volcanologists can be done as long as they evacuated is awareness of the risks where the population understand the information and have sufficient commu - understand what to do. The WLPB and SISTER VILLAGE nication skills to approach the population, uphold the programs are examples of community-based prepared- value of equality, and use inclusive and emphatic man- ness and represent a learning process to identify and fulfil ners. In reality, good communication between scientists needs through communication and coordination. and the decision makers and the community occurs with Personal communication between scientists and decision experience and through a good network, as it needs trust makers, and between scientists and the community is very between parties. The more frequent and continual the useful to build community resilience through self-responsi- communication, the more trust and connection that is bility and a sense of belonging. This process has already hap - built. This process needs to be supported by good coop - pened in communities that have to coexist with many, or/and eration between community and agencies involved in risk long and/or continuous eruptions (e.g. Kelud and Merapi). management. On the other hand, straightforward and Consensus and deliberation in risk communication is a non-technical language is needed to have effective com - bottom-up process, involving the community in decision munication. In the case of Indonesia’s communities, it is making and engagement with the government. At the important to approach the community through its cul- end, it is a joint effort between scientists, decision mak - ture, and this varies from place to place. There are some ers and the community. In the long-term, facilities and examples of high trust between the public and scientist/ infrastructure need to be developed together with the governments, such as in Kelud (Andreastuti et al. 2019) improvement of capacity and progress in spatial planning and Merapi (Subandriyo et al. 2019). Risk communica- to strengthen resilience to volcanic hazards. tion also should be maintained during normal situations During a volcano crisis, the response to volcanic phe- when there is no crisis, in order to facilitate communica- nomenon and its impact to social, economic and politic tion during a crisis (Donovan and Oppenheimer 2018). aspects cannot be separated, and thus proper actions The communication between scientist, stakeholders and need to include various sides and stakeholders. During the community needs to be carried out in a direct or the implementation of the response, an agency needs indirect manner during periods of quiescence. This can to bridge between all these components as coordinator be done through joint Disaster Risk Reduction Program, in order to facilitate communication and have an effec - such as WLPB or other related activities (e.g. SISTER tive and successful outcome. The NDMA of Indonesia VILLAGE), so that communication can be established has this function in order to facilitate an integrated long before a crisis occurs. action in disaster management. Indonesia has a system Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 18 of 20 Declarations of institutions that manage science, and others that are responsible for social aspect, including evacuation, ref- Competing interests ugee handling, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. All Not applicable. these aspects of disaster risk need policies to support Author details public needs before, during, and after a crisis occurs. Centre for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation, Geological Agency, This includes availability and access to information, Bandung, Indonesia. Universitas Pembangunan Nasional ‘Veteran’, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. social protection, education, training and skill develop- ment for disaster management. Finally, each individual Received: 26 November 2021 Accepted: 28 April 2023 volcano provides unique lessons and occasionally raises new questions and problems that need to be solved. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out reviews on previ - ous strategies after a disaster has occurred to obtain a References better result in the future. Adi IB, Wacana P, Purwanto S, Widdiyanto S Pembangkang dari G, Merapi (2015) Seputar pengalaman belajar bersama komunitas lereng Merapi. In: Paripurno ET, editor. https:// mmb. upnyk. ac. id/ downl oad Andreastuti S, Budianto A, Paripurno ET (2018) Integrating social and physical Abbreviations perspectives of mitigation policy and practice in Indonesia. In: Fearnley BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (National Disaster CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano Management Agency/NDMA) World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 307–320 BPBD Provinsi Provincial Disaster Management Agency Andreastuti S, Paripurno ET, Gunawan H, Budianto H, Syahbana DK (2019) BPBD Kabupaten/Kota Regional Disaster Management Agency for Regency/ Character of community response to volcanic crises at Sinabung and City Kelud volcanoes. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 382:298–310. https:// doi. org/ CBDRM Community-based Disaster Risk Management 10. 1016/j. jvolg eores. 2017. 01. 022 CVGHM C entre for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation Astriani F (2017) Mitigasi bencana gunung Merapi berbasis desa bersaudara BMKG Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi and Geofisika (Meteorological, (Sister Village) di Kecamatan Musuk Kabupaten Boyolali Jawa Tengah (BSc Climatological and Geophysical Agency Thesis). Fakultas Geografi Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta GVP Global Volcanism Program Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah (BPBD) Kabupaten Magelang (2016) IC Incident Commander Kebijakan Penanggulangan Bencana di Kabupaten Magelang. Badan MAGMA Multiplatform Application for Geohazard Mitigation and Assess- Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah Kabupaten Magelang, Magelang ment in Indonesia Balasubramanian A (2018) Basics of cultural geography. Project: Educational SFDRR S endai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction Video Documentaries in Earth. Atmospher Ocean Sci. https:// doi. org/ 10. SBY Susilo Bambag Yudhoyono 13140/ RG.2. 2. 31894. 65604 UNDRR Unit ed Nation Disaster Risk Reduction Becker JS, Leonard GS, Potter SH, Coomer MA, Paton D, Wright KC et al (2018) UNISDR Unit ed Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Organisational response to the 2007 Ruapehu Crater Lake dam-break VAR Volcano Activity Report lahar in New Zealand: Use of communication in creating an effective VEN V olcano Eruption Notice response. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) VON Volcano Observation Notice for Aviation, Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 253–269 VEI Volcano Explosivity Index Bignami C, Bosi V, Costantini L, Cristiani C, Lavigne F, Thierry P (2012) Handbook WLPB Wajib Latih Penanggulangan Bencana (Compulsory Disaster for volcanic risk management: prevention, crisis management, resilience. Management Training Program) MIAVITA team, Orleans http://miavita.brgm.fr Cadag JR, Driedger C, Garcia C, Duncan M, Gaillard JC, Lindsay J et al (2018) Acknowledgements Fostering participation of local actors in volcanic disaster risk reduction. We would like to thank to the Head of CVGHM that provided us the oppor- In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing tunity to be in the field during volcanic crisis. We also would like to thank the volcano world. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 474–496 the Quick Response Teams (Sinabung, Merapi, Kelud and Agung Volcanoes), Chatfield AT, Reddick CG (2015) Understanding risk communication gaps including observers at these volcanoes, and local governments. We also highly through e-government website and twitter hashtag content analyses: appreciated the Institute for Research and Community Service, Universitas The case of Indonesia’s Mt. Sinabung eruption. Homeland Secur Emerg Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta for supporting these activities. Manag 12(2):351–385 Finally, our deepest appreciation to Prof. Fidel Costa for proofreading and CHGHM Internal Report (2022) Laporan Kelompok Kerja Tim Penyiapan Bahan providing valuable suggestions. Sosialisasi Informasi Gunung Api Wilayah Timur, Tahun 2021 (in Indone- sian), Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation Authors’ contributions Cronin SJ, Gaylord DR, Charley D, Alloway BV, Wallez S, Esau JW (2004) Partici- SA prepared the first and second manuscripts, Figs. 1 and 2, EP contributed on patory methods of incorporating scientific with traditional knowledge for the discussion of risk communication and CBDRM, SS contributed on WLPB, DS volcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Vanuatu. Bull Volcanol. prepared detailed discussion on alert level to improve the manuscript, AP prepared 66:652–668. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00445- 004- 0347-9 Figs. 3, 4 and 5. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript. Decree of Head of National Disaster Management Agency (2014) No 11 concerning the participation of public in disaster management. Badan Funding Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia SA, SS, DS and AP were funded by the Center for Volcanology and Geological Haz- De la Cruz-Reyna S, Tilling RI, Valdés-González C (2018) Challenges in respond- ard Mitigation, Geological Agency, Indonesia. EP funded by Institute for Research ing to a sustained, continuing volcanic crisis: The case of Popocatépetl and Community Service, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta. volcano, Mexico, 1994-present. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Availability of data and materials Heidelberg, pp 235–252 Not applicable. del Marmol MA, Fontijn K, Atanga M, Njome S, Mafany G, Tening A et al (2018) Investigating the management of geological hazards and risks in the Mt Cameroon area using Focus Group Discussions. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird A ndreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 19 of 20 DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. analysis of affected communities’ evacuation response Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 373–394 during the 2014. J Appl Volcanol 10(6):1–24 Direktorat Vulkanologi, Prosedur Tetap Mitigasi Bencana Gunungapi, Published Marty J (2015) Summary: scientific communication of uncertainty during by Direktorat Vulkanologi, Direktorat Jendral Geologi dan Sumberdaya volcanic crises. In: Loughlin SC, Sparks S, Brown SK, Jenkins SF, Brown CV Mineral; 1996 (eds) Global volcanic hazards and risk, pp 72–73 Donovan A, Oppenheimer C (2018) Imagining the unimaginable: Com- McKee C, Itikarai I, Davies H (2018) Instrumental volcano surveillance and com- municating extreme volcanic risk. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, munity awareness in the lead-up to the 1994 eruptions at Rabaul, Papua McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, New Guinea. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Heidelberg, pp 149–164 Observing the volcano world. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 204–233 Eendi ff TN (2013) Community Gotong Royong culture in current social change Mei ETW, Lavigne F, Picquout A, de Bélizal E, Brunstein D, Grancher D et al (in Indonesia). J Pemikiran Sosiol 2:1–17 (2013) Lessons learned from the 2010 evacuations at Merapi volcano. J Elysia V, Widahanto A (2018) The Sister Village program: Promoting community Volcanol Geotherm Res 261:348–365 resilience after Merapi eruption. Indones J Plan Dev. https:// doi. org/ 10. Miles L, Gordon R, Bang H (2018) Blaming active volcanoes or active volcano 14710/ ijpd.3. 1. 32- 43 blame? In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Erfurt-Cooper P (2018) Active hydrothermal features as tourist attractions. In: Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 395–409 Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Nakada S, Zaennudin A, Yoshimoto M, Maeno F, Suzuki Y, Hokanishi N et al Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 85–105 (2017) Growth process of the lava dome/flow complex at Sinabung Fearnley CJ, Beaven S (2018) Volcano alert level systems: managing the chal- volcano during 2013–2016. J Volcanol Geotherm Res. https:// doi. org/ 10. lenges of effective volcanic crisis communication. Bull Volcanol. 80(5):46. 1016/j. jvolg eores. 2017. 06. 012 https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00445- 018- 1219-z Newhall C, Solidum RU (2018) Volcanic hazard communication at Pinatubo Fukuyama Y (1995) Trust: The Social virtues and the creation of prosperity, vol from 1991 to 2015. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly 3. Hamish Hamilton Affairs, London, pp 187–203 G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp Gabrielsen H, Procter J, Rainforth H, Black T (2018) Reflections from an indig- 189–203 enous community on volcanic event management, communications and Nugroho SP, Diartoko P, Sulistyo R, Suryanto C, Yon KM, Aprilidia et al (2015) A resilience. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Community experience in managing Mount Kelud eruption. Story from Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 463–479 The East, BNPB, with support from Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Gaillard JC (2008) Alternative paradigm of volcanic risk perception: the Case of Reduction Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 172:315–328 Papale (2017) Rational volcanic hazard forecasts and the use of volcanic alert Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia (2008) No 21 concerning levels. J Appl Volcanol 6:13 disaster management Parent M, Vandebeek CA, Gemino AC (2005) Building citizen trust through Gunawan H, Mulyana AR, Solihin A, Pujowarsito, Riyadi (2013) Peta Kawasan e-government. Govern Inform Q 22(4):20–736 Rawan Bencana G. Sinabung, Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Paripurno ET, Nugroho ARB (2018) The effectiveness of community-based Geologi early warning system of Kelud volcano eruption. MATEC Web of Confer- Gunawan H, Mulyana AR, Solihin A, Pujowarsito, Riyadi (2015) Peta Kawasan ences 229, 03015. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1051/ matec conf/ 20182 29030 15 Rawan Bencana G. Sinabung, Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Prambada O, Zaenuddin A, Irianto Santosa I, Nakada M, Yoshimoto M (2010) Geologi Geological Map of Sinabung Volcano, Center for Volcanology and Geological https:// magma. vsi. esdm. go. id/ index. php on The Center for Geological Hazard Hazard Mitigation. Geological Agency, Bandung Mitigation website (n.d.) Pramono SM. Kami mengungsi bukan diungsikan. Pasag Merapi. 2012. https:// https:// mmb. upnyk. ac. id/ berita/ penin gkatan- kapas itas- masya rakat- gunung- pasag- merapi. blogs pot. com/ 2012/ 02/ kami- mengu ngsi- bukan- di- ungsi agung on The Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran website (n.d.)kan. html? fbclid= IwAR1 1XxIT 2kyiD iMpD4 u7y_ jJtCL ZaeiP dNlIz S0rk- https:// www. undrr. org/ termi nology on The UN UN for Disaster Risk Reduction gAWX8 xd3E5 H3KJG ZM. website (n.d.) Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic (2008) No 8 concerning national Indonesia National Standard no 8039-2018 Manajemen pelatihan kesiapsia- disaster management agency gaan terhadap bahaya erupsi gunungapi. Badan Standardisasi Nasional Presidential Decree of the Indonesia Republic (2018) No 17 concerning the Komorowski JC, Morin J, Jenkins S, Kelman I (2018) Challenges of volcanic cri- arrangement of disaster management in certain condition during a ses on Small Islands States. In: Fearnley CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, volcanic crisis Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Punongbayan RS, Newhall CG, Bautista LP, Garcia D, Harlow DH, Hoblitt RP, pp 353–371 Sabit JP, Solidum RU. Eruption hazard assessments and warnings. 2012. Lavigne F, Morin J, Mei ETW, Calder ES, Usamah M, Nugroho U (2018) Mapping https:// pubs. usgs. gov/ pinat ubo/ punon g2/ index. html. hazard zones, rapid warning communication and understanding com- Rahman MB (2016) Community resilience: Learning from Mt Merapi eruption munities: Primary ways to mitigate pyroclastic flow hazard. In: Fearnley 2010. Proc Soc Behav Sci:387–394. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. sbspro. 2016. CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano 06. 090 World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 106–119 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) (2015-2030). United Law of the Republic of Indonesia (2007) No 24 concerning disaster Nations management Stewart C, Wilson TM, Sword-Daniels V, Wallace KL, Magill CR, Horwell C et al Law of the Republic of Indonesia (2007) No 26 concerning spatial planning (2018) Communication demands of volcanic ashfall events. In: Fearnley Leonard G, Potter S (2015) Developing effective communication tools for CJ, Bird DK, Haynes H, McGuire WJ, Jolly G (eds) Observing the Volcano volcanic hazards in New Zealand, using social science. In: Loughlin SC, World. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 23–49 Sparks S, Brown SK, Jenkins SF, Brown CV (eds) Global Volcanic Hazards Subandriyo, Sayudi D, Putra R (2019) Survei persepsi masyarakat sebagai and Risk, pp 305–310 dasar evaluasi program pelatihan penanggulangan bencana di Kawasan Lestari FA, Susilo TEB, Khaerudin (2017) Communication as an effort to disaster Rawan Bencana G. The International Conference on Disaster Manage- risk reduction for society (in Indonesian). J Prodi Manajemen Bencana 3:1 ment, ICDM. Pertemuan Ilmiah Tahunan (PIT ) ke-6, Ikatan Ahli Kebenca- Lowenstern JB, Wallace K, Barsotti S, Sandri L, Stovall W, Bernard B, Privitera E, naan Indonesia (IABI), BOGOR, Merapi Komorowski JC, Fournier N, Balagizi C, Garaebiti E (2022) Guidelines for Sudarmanto S (2020) Peran Komunitas Jangkar Kelud dalam membangun ket- volcano-observatory operations during crises: recommendations from angguhan masyarakat di sekitar G. Kelud (Studi tentang peran Komunitas the 2019 volcano observatory best practices meeting. J Appl Volcanol Jangkar Kelud pra, saat, dan paska erupsi G. Kelud tahun 2014, di Kabu- 11:3 (1–24) paten Blitar, Kediri dan Malang). (MSc Theses). Universitas Pembangunan Marsh T (2014) Talking safety: a user’s guide to world class safety conversation. Nasional Veteran, Yogyakarta. https:// eprin ts. upnyk. ac. id/ id/ eprint/ 22022 Gower Publishing, 126 pages Syahbana DK, Kasbani K, Suantika G, Prambada O, Andreas AS, Saing UB et al Martinez-Villegas MM, Solidum RU Jr, Saludadez JA, Pidlaoan AC, Ruben (2019) The 2017–19 activity at Mount Agung in Bali (Indonesia): intense C, Lamela RC (2021) Moving for safety: a qualitative Andreastuti et al. Journal of Applied Volcanology (2023) 12:3 Page 20 of 20 unrest, monitoring, crisis response, evacuation, and eruption. Nature 9:8848. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598- 019- 45295-9 Scientific Reports UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction (2009), United Nations United Nation Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (2016) https:// www. undrr. org/ termi nology/ mitig ation Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (2014) At risk: natural hazards, people vul- nerability and disasters, 2nd edn. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4324/ 97802 03714 775 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in pub- lished maps and institutional affiliations. Re Read ady y to to submit y submit your our re researc search h ? Choose BMC and benefit fr ? Choose BMC and benefit from om: : fast, convenient online submission thorough peer review by experienced researchers in your ﬁeld rapid publication on acceptance support for research data, including large and complex data types • gold Open Access which fosters wider collaboration and increased citations maximum visibility for your research: over 100M website views per year At BMC, research is always in progress. Learn more biomedcentral.com/submissions

Journal

Journal of Applied Volcanology – Springer Journals

Published: May 20, 2023

Keywords: Volcano; Disaster management; Early warning; WLPB; SISTER VILLAGE; Communication; Coordination; Crisis; Community response; Policy; Strategy review

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

Volcano disaster risk management during crisis: implementation of risk communication in Indonesia

References (55)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies