Political Support for Preparedness

Cultures and Their Preparedness Environment

In Kenya, pastoralism is considered a relic of a bygone era, so political leaders fail to recognize the reality and vulnerability of vast populations living in arid, rural areas. These populations experience regular cycles of flooding, famine, and related diseases that could have been mitigated through use of predictive charting and warning systems available through international aid programs. However, politicians continually neglect these vulnerable rural populations, offering no preparedness programming. Having little political voice in their society, these people have no access to policymakers, or press coverage of their plight. In a mass-mediated global environment, a disaster does not exist in the minds of many unless it has exposure in the press. Political support for mitigation cannot exist under such cultural conditions.

In the United States, where sophisticated emergency management systems are in place, preparedness programs are often adopted or abandoned depending on current political priorities. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is driven by the Stafford Act, which was amended at the turn of the century to include the Disaster Mitigation Act. It called for preparedness programs to be adopted and enforced by local, state, and tribal emergency managers. This widespread program addressed regional and local concerns encouraging communities, businesses, and families to develop distinctive preparedness programs and plans based on an all-hazards approach that were idiosyncratic to community circumstances. It was short lived when the priority for preparedness changed from an all-hazards approach to an emphasis on terrorism and real or perceived threats to the homeland.

Across south Asia, women are involved in a variety of community and family preparedness actions, such as maintaining informal communication networks, and socially transmitting folklore about disaster preparedness activities and warning signs. But these cultural actions generally go unrecognized politically, and are underutilized by policymakers more interested in scientific emergency management. Responsibility for preparedness is therefore placed in the home and communal arena, not in the political sphere. The impact of such a disparity leads to a schism between indigenous approaches and modern scientific approaches, with little hope of blending the two.

...