Using Creative Approaches in Communicating Risks to Populations Exposed to Natural Hazards

Abstract

What is so special about risk communication? In a country beset with natural hazards and disasters that are projected to worsen due to climate change, there is an urgency for policymakers, practitioners, and educators to understand their role and become better skilled risk communicators. Communication is considered an art and a science. Risk communication comes with greater burden in the sense that it seeks to deliver correct information that the viewer cannot interpret in any other way, elicit the desired response, and incite action with urgency. It is also imperative to communicate messages within the context and ‘realm’ of the audience, otherwise it will be lost. Capturing the attention of the viewer with technical information is a creative challenge. This chapter presents an overview of theoretical foundations of communication, discusses risk communication standards in texts and graphic requirements, accepted conventions, language and symbols for specific groups, and provides concrete applications of communication strategies and new approaches. Finally, this chapter gives concrete recommendations on how to design and create risk communication materials to help and equip the reader who is also a communicator.

FormalPara Key Points

• The climate emergency is an urgent issue affecting everyone in the world, regardless of how differently people perceive, interpret, and communicate “climate change.”

• Anyone has the potential to become an effective risk communicator. Following the principles of risk communication, we are better able to call for urgent measures to address climate change in a more holistic manner.

• Risk communication is a strategy in disaster risk reduction that contributes to more comprehensive risk assessment by integrating information from hazard analysis mapping and forecasting conducted by specialized scientists, with information from the analysis of vulnerabilities, exposures, and possible damages as validated by people in their own contexts. It is the communication of real climate risk scenarios that makes it crucial and effective.

FormalPara Summary for Policymakers

Anyone has the potential to become an effective risk communicator, but for policymakers and educators, practicing the art and science of risk communication is crucial given the climate emergency. To hone our skills, we must embed in ourselves certain traits that will help us become effective risk communicators.

Study the audience. Collect information, observe audience attributes, and involve the audience as much as possible in crafting the communication material. Use local narratives, color, and shapes that the audience can relate to, and avoid the ones that they dislike.

The following is a proposed set of guides in crafting communication for an audience:

• Study the audience. Collect information, observe audience attributes, and involve the audience as much as possible in crafting the communication material. Use local narratives, colors, and shapes, that the audience can relate to, and avoid use of the same to the ones that they dislike. Translate technical terms to words that relate to the audience’s experience. Check what information channels are available to them, and what they enjoy using the most.

• Adhere to standards when it is required.

  The set of standards for signs and signals exist for public order. Where standards are binding, observe them. But beware, some accepted standards and conventions are only influenced by industry and are not established by law. In this case, the so-called standards can be modified and translated to symbols that are closer to the audience’s realm of experience.

• Use technologies that can work in the area. While the current level of technologies facilitates the authoring of creative media, the communication process can only work if the audience can receive and use the material as designed. Check communication delivery systems such as available transmission and projection systems, access to the internet, space, facilities, etc., to verify that the communication material will not be distorted by way of delivery. However, note that the creation of communication materials is not totally dependent on delivery.

• Allow the audience to interact with media. Stimulation through different senses, including movement and interaction with the media and content, facilitates learning. For instance, using digital media, engaging the audience in appreciating the communication media to the point where they may inject new information materials establishes their “stakeholder” posture and allow multiple points of data entry.

• Plan for a communication campaign. Planning campaigns that are audience-focused and time-sensitive ensures the appropriate use of resources. Campaigns are tactically short and focused but strategically protracted and extensive. Latch onto current trends, but explore original creations. Disrupting the mainstream but keeping on track of delivering the correct science behind the message is a creative challenge.

Plan audience focused and time-sensitive campaigns. Latch onto current trends, but explore original creations. Disrupt the mainstream but keep on track that the science behind the message is delivered.

For Example:

As a policy implementer, did you ever experience sounding the alarm of an impending flood but some residents refuse to leave their houses despite the risk to their lives? How about informing residents of the threat of an imminent volcanic eruption but some residents choose to secure their dwellings, harvest, and livestock first? You may conclude that these people are just too stubborn to understand what’s good for them, that they fail to understand that the protocols set in place for these kinds of situations are for their own good.

However, when people choose to secure their houses and belongings rather than evacuate, maybe they are really so mindful of the danger but the investment and sacrifices made just to acquire their properties, and the thought of leaving them behind as legacies for their children—are just as valuable as a life. We need to communicate to them then that preserving their lives preserves their legacy. In saying that, we understand their predicament but that their safety and their lives will lead to nurturing these legacies even more, could maybe, lead them to evacuate with less reluctance.

“Maybe” is used because just as communication is an art, there may be some discrepancies between the expected and the actual results. On the other hand, science tells us that in observed conditions, the use of language, tone, and inflection, even gestures in face-to-face communication say a lot about our messages.

• In graphic forms, color, texture, shape, composition, and layout—and duration of movements in moving images—convey a profusion of meanings.

• In choice of media, going personal or face-to-face, through the airwaves or the internet, on paper, the choice of tone and story, are decisions that must be made by risk communicators.

Educating ourselves on how to use tools in communication and knowing how the population will relate to these will most likely reduce the discrepancies between the expected and the actual results in our communication initiative.

Educating ourselves on how to use tools in communication and knowing how the population will relate to these will most likely reduce the discrepancies between the expected and the actual result in our communication initiative.

1 Introduction

The Philippines is a hotspot of hazards. It sits in the “Pacific Ring of Fire,” and is prone to earthquakes and typhoons, and with it, floods and landslides—even fires when heatwaves occur during the hot months of summer. Inculcating safety procedures, training instinctive responses, and securing environmental structures—these are tasks that are embedded in the principles of Disaster Risk Reduction that are being applied to the level of municipalities and communities. The increasing incidence of disasters due to natural hazards worldwide has been—by a large segment of scientists—attributed to “climate change.” Climate change in the Philippines is still a label not so clearly critical to many, being perceived as a naturally occurring phenomenon, perhaps even with religious undertones, and therefore, often we deal with climate risks when they already turn into disasters. Still, many now believe we ourselves are the main culprits in hastening the advance of climate change due to our uncontrolled use of earth’s resources. We burn fossil fuels—coal, oil, natural gas—and cut down more forests, raise methane-emitting livestock—practices shown to produce “greenhouse” gases that are causing global warming which in turn is believed to drive climate change and its dangerous impacts.

We are possibly at the tipping point of the “climate change” crisis and yet, this is not being visibly addressed with urgency. Maybe in part it is because we live in a country with so many hazards. However, we do notice the manifestations of climate change in headline-hogging disasters that strike us. We can relate to more heatwaves and stronger typhoons in the recent years, brought about by changing weather systems as we come across more announcements by PAGASA. We can easily relate to the polluted air that we breath and the contaminated water that we drink. If we can view each of these real hazards as the many “frames” that form the bigger “window” called climate change, we can better understand it, become more aware of our personal risks with these hazards, and learn how to cushion its advance in specific ways, and develop adaptive lifestyles that mitigate its effects. We can do this using the principles of risk communication in calling for urgent measures to address climate change in a more holistic manner. Risk communication is a strategy in DRR as it creates a more comprehensive risk assessment by integrating information from hazard analysis mapping and forecasting conducted by specialized scientists, with information from the analysis of vulnerabilities, exposures, and possible damages as validated by people in their own contexts. It is the communication of real climate risk scenarios that makes it crucial and effective.

Technology today allows us to communicate in many formats—text, graphics, animations, emoticons, videos—actively in real time or passively in own time. With so much information coming our way, and in so many formats, the communicator has to be armed with information, tools, and devices that will capture the attention of the intended audience, discriminate on the content, and act in desired fashion. Advertisers are challenged in the same way, goading consumers to buy products, choose a person over another, or work on a task. This form of communication often uses metaphors with veiled messages in language and visual formats, with the aim of quickly capturing the attention of the viewer and delivering a short and direct message in a burst of seconds. Risk communication comes with greater burden in the sense that risk communication seeks to deliver correct information that the viewer cannot interpret in any other way, elicit the desired response, and incite action with urgency. Capturing the attention of the viewer with technical information is a creative challenge.

The early part of the chapter discusses the emergence of interdisciplinary research into natural hazards and disasters along with the theoretical foundations of communication in the way that it is formed, enunciated, and received. Scientific studies are cited so that the reader may be more discriminating of information, or study the concepts in greater detail. Suffice it to say that communication has a robust scientific background, and studies on the subject either drive the development of technology associated with it or are driven by technological advances. Today, the media for communication has punched through virtual space, further enriching the realm of the communicators’ domain. Still, even armed with rich resources, the communicator must play within the bounds of the audience’s realm of experience or risk losing their interest and their participation in the thread of things.

Risk communication has been studied and used to develop materials that can be applied worldwide. These are made using standardized templates, many of which are regulated by law or prescribed by industries. Regulated signs should be used when called for. The meanings are established and documented and should be applied without subjecting it to reinterpretration. However, they are limited and designed with utmost simplicity so that they are visually distinct and steer clear of cultural biases. We see most of these standard signs in traffic and institutional environments, but where no rules apply, policymakers, and designers can develop signs and symbols that are formed along thematic lines, often cultural appropriations or functional derivations that are closely associated with the lifestyle of the population. Studying how the population responds to images then is a prerequisite to developing these communication materials. Better still, involve the community itself in crafting these materials so that they will own the messages and their embodiments in text, shapes, and colors—even movement for video formats.

Communities are social systems that are highly relevant to the collective action called for in dealing with climate change. But the collective action required for climate change adaptation involves our individual consumption of limited shared resources that are considered as public goods—water, food, and energy. This situation is called a social dilemma. From a psychological perspective, a social dilemma is when members are asked to give up something for the good of everyone, that is, to minimize their use of the public goods. This is easier said than done in terms of climate risk adaptation because for real people reducing consumption of energy is not just the abstract notion of “energy” but includes reducing your use of gasoline, cooking gas, bath water, bringing baskets to the grocery, not eating meat, limiting your gadgets, and use of internet. Studies show that in such cases, there is a notion of “diffused responsibility” and a strong tendency towards “social loafing”—when individuals choose not to participate in the collective action because of self-interests, placing the responsibility instead on others, thinking the effect of not doing anything will not be noticeable. The social dilemma is whether the individual will choose to be cooperative or selfish.

How can risk communication strategies address this dilemma? If our messages are also crafted so that we do not just pass on risk information without a frame of reference, but present these messages so that the interests of each individual “self” is a frame that is overlapping with the interests of others in the community, we can help build a collective goal for the community. It is the sense of identity as a Filipino that made “It’s more fun in the Philippines!” such a successful tourism communication strategy.

1.1 Understanding Disaster Risk Reduction

Under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, the first priority for achieving its seven global targets for 2015–2030 is understanding disaster risk in all its dimensions. This includes not only understanding the features of hazards in our environments but also the characteristics of people, including vulnerabilities and capacities, values, and experiences.

The notion of disaster and disaster risk as consequences of interactions between people and their natural and built environments is not at all new and partly traces its roots to the emerging field of environmental psychology during the 1950s and 1960s. The discipline was formed out of interest in gaining a better understanding of the physical features of the environment in which behavior occurs, and also out of some uncertainty with the social relevance and ecological validity of research conducted mainly in a laboratory, defined as a “non-environment.” The trend eventually developed into the “contextual revolution” in psychology, with its main emphasis on a transactional-contextual approach (Bonnes and Bonaiuto 2002, 28–30).

In the 1970s, increasing human populations and vulnerabilities spurred more research in natural disasters across different disciplines, each with their own particular interests, such as loss reduction for geography and emergency preparedness in sociology. Notably, the common element in these interests was the recognition that disasters and disaster risks are the consequence of the interaction between the natural, social, and built environments. In the mid-1970s, the different disciplines combined efforts to assess the existing research on natural hazards, thereby mixing perspectives from climatology, sociology, economics, engineering, geology, law, meteorology, psychology, public policy, and many others (Peek and Mileti 2002, 512–513). The result was the establishment of the interdisciplinary approach to disaster risk reduction (DRR) that is now an important feature of the Sendai Framework.

In the Philippines, disaster risk reduction became part of disaster management only from 2005 onwards. The Climate Change Act (CCA), enacted by Congress in 2009, was followed a year later by the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (PDRRM) Act. These two laws enable the integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change programs and initiatives particularly in relation to capacity building of communities. There are different views as to how integration can be made, but DRR may be more easily grasped by communities because of its clear benefits to both individual members as well as the whole community. Hence, one strategy is to employ community-based DRR as a leverage for climate adaptation programs (Mercer 2010). Using disaster risk reduction as a way of adaptation can be achieved by strong community participation in identifying their vulnerabilities and exposure to a variety of hazards. Such as seen below, in a Maribojoc tourist spot—the SAVIMA Mangrove boardwalk tour.

Fig. 17.1

Photo of the SAVIMA Mangrove boardwalk tour, a Maribojoc tourist spot

Fig. 17.2

Photo from a DRRM workshop in Maribojoc held in 2018 as part of a UP Emerging Interdisciplinary Research (EIDR) project on Learning Tourism Destinations which produced vulnerability and exposure maps by and for the community, which they used on their own initiative to set up just a few months later their own warning signs

Risk assessments that are based on such inputs can produce warning information that are more likely to lead to community compliance because they are perceived as meaningful and consistent with the beliefs and value systems of local folk. In the case of Typhoon Yolanda, one painful lesson was that the warning system may have underestimated the strength of the typhoon and also used a locally unfamiliar term (i.e., storm surge) as a signal for which appropriate actions could not be discerned. This led to delayed and non-adaptive responses not just by the community but even by the local DRRM structure.

Successful risk reduction measures often utilize mixtures of technological and psychosocial designs. PAG-ASA still uses number coding for typhoon alerts but has enhanced their warnings with affect-laden color codes and visual and/or vivid text-based descriptions of possible impacts, such as tree branches breaking and roofs flying off. But climate change adaptation requires not only collaboration of experts from different disciplines but also continuous partnering with communities who can contribute their own knowledge and share their approaches to decision-making. Effective risk communication thus allows individuals and communities to learn efficient and acceptable risk reduction behaviors that can transform into adaptive daily habits.

While more researchers and scientists are gaining an increased understanding of disaster risk, and developing more valid, more precise risk assessments, we are yet to increase efforts for the public to understand disaster risk from their own perspective. To communicate disaster risk and influence public behavior towards the goal of disaster risk reduction and resilience, and ultimately, climate change adaptation, we urgently need to create warning–response systems that are based on real risk scenarios.

2 Models of Communication

2.1 People-Environment Framework in Communication

The human nervous system is probably the most amazing communications system. It allows various parts of the body to receive stimuli from the environment and send messages about the stimuli to the brain, traveling along intricate networks formed by tiny units called neurons. These neurons create the structure of the nervous system and organize its functions based on “connectivity.” This connectivity enables information processing through diverse communication patterns, including convergent, divergent, parallel and feedback-loop circuits, to produce analog and/or digital codes based on the electrical and/or chemical information going through the network (Goldstein 2013).

It is worthy to note that the nervous system, especially the brain, is a malleable entity. It can adapt to special circumstances—when the eyes go blind, the neurons previously assigned to process visual stimulation begin to create new connections with the nearby neurons of the auditory cortex. In this manner the system is learning to behave differently—it compensates for the loss of the visual sense by strengthening another sense, in this case, hearing. This capacity for learning and adaption is called neuroplasticity (Goldstein 2013).

The end purpose of the nervous system is to allow people to perceive their environment through specialized sensing mechanisms—visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and kinesthetic. Communication begins with the detection of stimuli in various forms of energy from the environment which are received by the sensory organs of the body. These stimuli are encoded into neural signals which are processed along sensory pathways, also called nerves, in the peripheral nervous system.

The processed information is analyzed further and interpreted in the central nervous system in the cortex of the brain to produce our perceptions of the environment. For example, the brain analyzes the patterns of light waves sent from the eyes into edges, shapes, colors, and movements. The mind interprets these patterns into recognizable and meaningful objects such as mango trees, speeding cars, dark clouds, old houses, or crowds of people. To perceive is somewhat a way to “make sense” of what is happening, to know what is out there so that we can respond appropriately to stimuli around us.

Interestingly, rapid developments in science have allowed for the design and creation of equipment that can mimic or extend the workings of our sensory systems. We have invented telescopes, amplifiers, cameras, seismometers, smoke detectors, etc.—essentially what we call remote-sensing devices because these devices are outside our bodies. Disaster warning systems often rely on such devices placed strategically on the sides of mountains, at the bottom of oceans, on the ground, or in space, to monitor the environment for hazard risks. These devices can detect signals that can be accessed and then analyzed by trained experts such as meteorologists, geologists, and volcanologists. Such experts can interpret the data to determine if hazard risks are developing and if the risks warrant the issuance of warnings to alert the public.

Unfortunately, ordinary people may often not perceive the same meanings in the warning systems that experts have developed according to what they themselves perceive from their special remote sensing devices. Such a gap in perceived meanings between experts and the ordinary public stems not from differences in sensing capabilities, but from diversity in interpretation based on personal knowledge and experiences. Hence, the gap of meanings is likely to result in a failure in communication because scientists interpret the data from their technical equipment using their technical expertise from their technical experiences. To develop more effective warning systems, the gap of meanings must be reduced not only by enabling the public to be more knowledgeable about hazards and hazard risks but, importantly, also by encouraging scientists to be more aware of people’s attitudes and experiences of disasters and hazard risks. The alternative to “encouraging scientists” to understand people, is to add another feature in our DRRM communication system that can serve as a “connector” between the scientists and the public. This would be social scientists and artists working together with the natural scientists.

This type of collaboration already has begun, of course, particularly in developing measures of risk assessment. Following a people–environment framework that views disasters as products of transactions between people and their environments, it is argued that public perceptions of hazards and disasters have very personal meanings derived from individual experiences and values. These meanings often contrast with the objective and analytical descriptions of hazard risks provided by hazard experts. More often than not, these experts define disaster risk in terms of measured probabilities of negative consequences associated with the physical properties of hazards. The choice of risk measures may in fact be subjective even for some consequences that are assumed by many to be highly objective, such as the number of fatalities.

In traffic research, the effects on traffic behavior are observed to vary greatly when providing statistics such as the number of traffic deaths per kilometer, compared to when using the number of traffic deaths per year. Vehicular deaths per year are meaningless as a “risk warning” to a person who has no choice but to drive or take a jeep every day to work. This can also be illustrated by the lack of effect on the behavior of pedestrians of a warning sign found in local streets indicating “Huwag tumawid, Nakamamatay” (translated roughly as “You may die if you cross here”), because there is no other alternative for crossing and/or the warning itself is not credible because you see many people crossing but you see none of them are dying.

Similarly in mining, the appropriate risk measure from a governance point of view may be deaths per million tons of coal, given the benefits obtained from coal. But from the miner’s point of view, the more relevant risk measure would be deaths per thousand heads employed since he/she could be one of those deaths (Crouch and Wilson 1982 in Slovic 2010). In other words, choice of descriptions of disaster risks must consider the perspective of the people and must be clearly relevant to their specific contexts.

While DRRM continues to evolve with more risk information from experts and stakeholders’ sharing their experiences with particular types of disasters, climate change adaptation is much more complicated. The concept of “climate change” in itself is already highly relative—“more frequent” earthquakes, “stronger” typhoons, and “hotter” summers are all highly dependent on other factors such as the age and gender of the person, or the location of the community. Additionally, the debate on the role of human activities in global warming continues and involves scientific data from both sides that cannot be ignored (Shafer 2017). Attributions to climate change for particular experiences with hazards can therefore be ambiguous—if events such as increased drought can be believed to be a natural occurrence, or to be even religious in nature, the urgency of planning specific actions to reduce risk tends to diminish, or at least becomes subject to disagreements among members of a community. These issues can be addressed by collecting clear information about the nature of climate change and climate change risks in a specific locale, in a language that is appropriate to the recipients. For example, rather than simply imposing the concept of climate change, a flipped method can be used so that evidence for climate change can actually be drawn out from the community itself from their own disaster narratives. For CC adaptation, more efforts are required to address these issues of sociodemographic, temporal, and spatial variabilities on such a large scale. More efficient processing of information can be made by adding more “connectors” in their communication models that can help clarify messages passing through to receivers.

Social scientists are important components in these models because their knowledge of behavior can help guide public response (Peek and Mileti 2002, 516). Ordinary people tend to think of risk more subjectively. People’s conceptions of risk are usually multidimensional, with emotional components (“dread”), cognitive components (“known/familiar”), and behavioral components (“controllability”). For example, in describing risks associated with typhoons, it may be important to (1) understand what is fearful about wind, (2) find out what do people understand or not understand about typhoons, and (3) what control will people have over typhoon risks—will it be easy or difficult to comply with safety measures? Consequently, disaster risks as determined by natural science experts are often fixed among them, but public perceptions of risk are dynamic and vary considerably across individuals.

While more psychometric techniques are being developed to improve measures of risk perception including disaster risk, there are psychological approaches which no longer focus on risk perception but on combinations of factors that influence how people will comply with safety procedures and warning systems. Some models examine homeostatic motivational processes that involve comparisons between perceived risks vis-à-vis acceptable risks to predict compliance (Mendoza 2004). Other studies examine the social amplification or attenuation of risk through media coverage, interest groups, politicians, and other social institutions (Pidgeon et al. 2003) which can lead to extreme regulation of industries perceived to be associated with disasters. All this information can be incorporated into crafting communication designs and messages.

Fig. 17.3

Risks are assessed in objective ways. This photo refers to objective ways that risks can be assessed and physically described

Fig. 17.4

Risk is personal and social. People perceive risks with different levels of dread and act in different ways. This photo shows people taking the opportunity to have fun in the midst of hazards while others show concern for others

2.2 Semiology (Ferdinand de Saussure) and Triadic Semiotics (Charles S. Peirce)

We start this section with a true-to-life narrative.

You have been appointed by the local government to implement disciplinary measures in the mid of a viral pandemic. You tell people to stay home. You tell them that if anyone is on a necessary errand, they need to display their quarantine pass, don a face mask, and not to cross barangay boundaries. On top of this, you instruct them to observe a 2-m distancing space between persons in any public place. This policy is state-sponsored and you, as a designated executor of this policy, not only implement it as matter function of your office but believe in it wholeheartedly, thus, implement it zealously believing that these actions are the only ways by which the community can contribute in the effort to curve the contagion. There may be initial successes, but as days wear on, the people you see milling around no longer observe this set of policies and just go about their merry ways as if the pandemic does not exist, or so you thought. But they counter, “We need to go out! We need to earn for us to eat!”How would you feel? What do you want to do? Will you be able to understand them? Or will the situation frustrate you so much as to wish violators of regulated health protocols to be shot? Sounds unlikely? Read the article “QC official threatens ‘shoot-to-kill’ policy for MECQ violators” to know how—when communication shuts down,—even the unlikely becomes real (Talabong 2020).

Risk communication works where the sender of information and the receiver of information reciprocate their signals in a meaningful way. Reciprocate meaning is a two-way communication, and meaningful in that the information is processed, meaning is understood, and an attendant response continues the thread of both communicators’ wave of thinking.

Fig. 17.5

Semiotic Model based on Ferdinand de Saussure (referred to as semiology), the sign relation is dyadic, consisting only of a form of the sign (the signifier) and its meaning (the signified)

The current practice of communication current relies heavily on multi-media—the use of text, images, and sounds—to convey meanings. Communicators or senders of information craft their messages to a target audience by way of printed materials or moving images that are designed so that the intended meanings will not be lost in the communication process. The “sign,” as indicated in the field of semiology, stands for the idea being communicated. It is the marriage between the word or sound (the signifier) and the concept for which it stands for (the signified) (Smith et al. 2005. 228–229). The semiotic theory model shows a reliance on the intersection of the sender’s and the receiver’s realm of experience to effectively communicate. The content represented by the sign from the sender matches the content received from the sign by the receiver, and the channel of communication transmits the information with integrity. If experiences do not match, or the channel distorts the messages, misinterpretation is very likely to happen.

An inclusive manner by which participants can craft their own narratives based on given images is espoused by Charles Sanders Peirce called Sign Theory of Semiotic or the Triadic Semiotics, “is an account of signification, representation, reference, and meaning. Although sign theories have a long history, Peirce’s accounts are distinctive and innovative for their breadth and complexity, and for capturing the importance of interpretation to signification” (Atkin 2013). The “interpretation” made by the receiver is a very important factor in communication. Communicators endeavor to engage the potential receivers of information in crafting communication materials to gain insights into process of an audience’s creation of meaning. For example, participatory workshops can be directed at surfacing individual or collective risk concerns. Using available resources—such as cartons, yarns, clay, stones, etc., participants in a disaster mitigation workshop can transform a flat surface into a properly scaled topographic representation of an area that residents in a community can mark with individually or collectively perceived hazards. One model of implementing a participatory workshop is outlined in the “Participatory three-dimensional mapping for disaster-risk reduction” (Gaillard and Maceda 2009). In summary, participants were made to construct three-dimensional maps (Divinuvo [Eastern Samar], Masantol [Pampanga], and Dagupan [Pangasinan]) of their community. They represent the different sectors and age brackets in the community. They were directed to mark livelihood areas, public and private lands, and the areas that they perceived to be hazardous or risky. They then discuss the reasons for their perceptions of risks and agree on recommendations to mitigate the risks. The generated information were then input into GIS hazard maps that can be used as references by local government officials and scientists for structural interventions and crafting local policies that aim to mitigate the risks to the communities. Indigenous knowledge is a good resource of authentic information.

Bottomline? We just can’t expect an audience to understand us if our language and our tone do not match their temper. Engage with our audience and learn their ways. Talk the way they talk, walk the way they walk, and they ease up on conversing mode. Once they get comfortable, there is better chance for us to influence their thinking and their actions.

3 Disaster Risk Communication

3.1 Disaster Risk and Related Factors

“Disaster risk is expressed as the likelihood of loss of life, injury or destruction and damage from a disaster in a given period of time” (UNISDR 2015). The hazards that cause the risks will have to be properly managed to mitigate the disastrous effects of the hazards when they do occur. Notably, disasters happen as a result of natural functions of the earth—can be volcanic eruptions and earthquakes, and human-influenced—such as floods and fires. Disaster risk relates highly with environmental forces, as it does with human habitation and its attendant activities. Whether natural or human-induced, people had to be informed about these hazards and how much risk they are exposed to.

The duality of disaster risks—ranging from being wholly naturally occurring on one end to being human-propelled on another—contributes to polarizing the issue of climate change. Climate change, appearing with cyclic regularity in earth’s history to many, predestines its occurrence, and so espouses a do-nothing attitude. For many others, human activity impacts the earth’s climate and so human intervention must be directed to mitigate its ill-effects. What point of view will you take? It can only do us good to take a proactive role towards the latter.

Communicating risks may be hampered by many constraints—especially the financial kind—and access to resources such as staff, domicile, and mobility. However, there are ways we can get by. Seek out partners such as corporations and government units. Include them in our information collaterals. Make them own up to our advocacy. Appeal to their altruistic sense. The energy that we will devote to convincing partners or sponsors should extend to our development of communication materials for our various audiences. Communicate with sharp and direct words. Speak with their language and tone. Will the bearer of the message be a support group, a partner? Or an implementing arm of the government whose aim is to impose or regulate? Or an educator who seeks to explain and inform? Communicating the presence of hazards, and risks to population often means prescribing certain activities including evacuations, for example, to pre-identified places that do not match the perceived levels of safety and basic comfort for the population. An evacuation center may be decrepit and over-populated, and worse, perceived to be prone to sex predation, Instructions may be met with apathy, or worse, resistance. Are these perceptions real or imagined? If real, then physical adjustments have to be made. If largely imaginary, communicating the benefits of evacuation over inaction to the population is essential.

Risk communication can take the form of static materials, moving images, or can be a face-to-face exchange. It may be a poster, infographic spread, video, or movie. It can be a storyline framed in “komiks” strips, or an emotional message contained in a painting or a public art. They can be delivered by people, “the emergency response worker rallying a community to evacuate in the middle of the rising flood. It is the community representatives sitting down with industry to discuss the siting and operation of a hazardous waste incinerator. Risk communication involves people from all walks of life—parents, children, legislative representatives, regulators, scientists, farmers, industrialists, factory workers, and writers. It is part of the science of risk assessment.” (Lundgren and McMakin 2013). Communication is a process, and it is not concluded with any one device.

Considering its vast array of stakeholders and the diversity of perspectives involved, communicating risks will have to take into account different value systems, but part of risk communication is to also develop in people a common value of safety. Risk information does not matter, if people are willing to take risks. Such systems may have been learned by people through legal instructions or cultural practices. It is worthwhile to take stock of signs and signals that are observed as a matter of legal abidance. Observing these should provide context in the process of continually creating signs and symbols that are more meaningful to specific receivers of information. It is often kidded about that Filipino are culturally happy people that even in adverse situations, humor permeates social exchanges.

As a visual communicator, let me illustrate a successful use of “irony” spiced with humor in communication material. To those who experienced the energy crisis of the 1980s, Asiong Aksaya is a character in a comic strip illustrated by national artist Lauro “Larry” Alcala. Ironical in Asiong’s predisposition to expend unnatural amounts of energy—gasoline, light, etc., but in the end leaves him the victim of his own wastefulness (Valino 2002). As a vehicle for messages on energy conservation, it is an idea out-of-the-box. The impact of Asiong Aksaya having saw print from 1976 to 1984 is not lost to many. Asiong Aksaya was easily assimilated into the popular lexicon as a pejorative—even an endearing term to chastise a wasteful friend.

Communicating through a filter that will serve to modulate the channel of communication may be through lenses or frames. “To break through the communication barriers of human nature, partisan identity, and media fragmentation, messages need to be tailored to specific medium and audience, using carefully researched metaphors, allusions, and examples that trigger a new way of thinking about the personal relevance of climate change, Framing—as a concept and area of research—spans several social science disciplines. Frames are interpretive storylines that set a specific train of thought in motion, communicating why an issue might be a problem, who or what might be responsible for it, and what should be done about it” (Nisbet 2009, 14). The Philippines need to up the ante on climate change discussions, and in doing so, there are frames worth considering, for isn’t climate change associated with pollution, deforestration, overpopulation, and overconsumption, among other human-induced problems? Wasn’t growing food crops over forest preserves a contested issue? Isn’t the virtue of protecting natural resources opposed to commercial forestry and mining interests. Isn’t water impounding and damming to serve the needs of sprawling metropolis anathema to preserving and protecting ancestral land and culture? These may be presented as polar opposites but in the end, the question is what should be done about them? From whose lenses are we framing the issues?

3.2 Communicating Disaster Risk

3.2.1 Standards in Texts and Graphic Requirements in Information Systems

“Recognizing that international uniformity of road signs, signals, and symbols and of road markings is necessary in order to facilitate international road traffic and to increase road safety,

Standards in text and graphic requirements for information systems were developed,” thus states the preamble of the Convention on Road Signs and Signals originally crafted in Vienna on November 8, 1968, with 56 subscribed member countries by July 1, 2007. This underscores the need for signs and signals that transcend political boundaries. Before this agreement, countries appropriate their own colors and shapes for road warning and information systems, often influenced by their own historical development in road and transportation systems, and external influences via trade or imperial expansion. The STOP sign was not always Red. It was also Yellow (Miller 2016).

In a shrinking global landscape, this leads to different interpretations of signs, and thus, it was imperative for countries to subscribe to an internationally accepted standard. The Vienna Convention of 1968 attempted to address the issue of standardizing road signs and signals ranging from road structural details, graphics, texts, and colors of road safety and information systems. Other supplementary agreements, such as the European Agreement, introduced additional details to the implementation of the standards (Vienna Convention, part 6).

Despite the prevalence of this standard on road signs and signals, there are marginal deviations that are culturally influenced. To many, a red traffic light always means STOP, a yellow means WARNING, and a green light GO. Not so clearly in many areas in Japan.

Drive around Japan long enough and you’ll probably run into one of the country’s mythical blue traffic lights. Elsewhere around the island, you’ll find “go” signals that are decidedly teal, turquoise, and aqua. “Is this signal broken?” you might wonder. “Did some overworked light-monger install the wrong bulbs?” The answer, it’s in the Japanese language…while it may appear that Japan uses blue traffic lights, the government assures us it’s actually just a very blue shade of green—green enough to satisfy international regulations, blue enough to still be called “ao” (Spektor 2016).

3.2.2 Survey of Legislated and Accepted Conventions in Hazard and Risk Communication

The world’s governments offer rich resource of standards relating to health, work, transportation, building, and different areas that form the built environment. However, an institution bearing a very strong influence in the design and manufacture of goods is not government but a private institution.

The ANSI or the American National Standard Institute is a “federation formed by standards writers and users, that manages the voluntary standards system in the United States” (ANSI, “What is ANSI”). ANSI is not a state institution, yet the design, performance specifications, and marking of safety eye and face products, and millions of other safety equipment all over the world subscribe to their specifications. The specifications were not decided at random. The standards were based on a long legacy of industrial practice and scientific investigations involving perceptions and user experience. This brings to the fore ANSI-prescribed safety colors that have roots in industrial America that are internationally observed as well today.

Colors can be distinctively differentiated by persons with normal sense of vision. To those with impaired visions, discriminating on color differences may be a problem. In the grayscale version of the safety colors where only color value (defined as the lightness or darkeness of a color) is shown, the colors (because they appear grayed out) do not appear distinct. This highlights the case of “colorblind” people who cannot accurately discriminate between the hazard colors that are of similar “value,” Elements other than hue and value must be taken into account in making signs, especially the ones that have widespread use. The shape of the sign, the integration of diagonal, vertical, and horizontal lines, and the thickness of these lines can come into play. If the design is going to be used mostly for a specific regional or cultural group, it will be more appropriate to use symbolic meanings that the population can relate to, even while carrying over some of the characteristics of the “standard” signs. Symbols and colors can have very strong cultural meanings. Their use, when appropriately used and made by the community itself, will have wider acceptance and following.

3.2.3 Language and Symbols Associated with Specific Cultural and Demographic Groups

Language and the cultural meanings associated with symbols make designing for a general audience problematic. Language appears to be a barrier in the full appreciation of the risks associated with issued warnings in the case of supertyphoon Haiyan in the Mideastern Philippines. Even though the hardest-hit areas received early warnings, the weather service and other officials later admitted that the victims were unfamiliar with the term “storm surge.” The last deadly storm surge in Tacloban had hit in 1887, more than a century before Haiyan. In a country with scores of regional languages, the government also did not have local terms to be able to communicate the phenomenon to everyone. After the disaster, the government agency worked with linguists to craft simpler meteorological terms to ensure the danger posed by typhoons, floods, landslides, and other adverse events would be fully understood by all (Why Super-Typhoon Haiyan was so Deadly 2018).

The style by which language is embedded in texts is by itself a powerful conveyor of meaning. This may be seen in corporate logotypes where the Brand is written in a way that makes it unique and easy to recall. The logotypes of Coca-Cola and San Miguel Beer come to mind for being so ubiquitous and do not need illustrating. But language-in-text combined with image is yet more powerful. In designing symbols, the shapes and colors need to correspond in meanings for the symbol to be received clearly. For a better assessment of the acceptability of design symbols, the concept of a “cultural palette” was proposed in the book Handbook in Visual Communication, to assist the designer in the development of culturally sensitive symbols (Smith et al. 2005, 119–122). The book states that a cultural palette is developed using a qualitative method involving a series of interviews and a collection of images compiled to an image bank. A panel of experts then determines which of the images are good (appropriate and inoffensive) and those that are poor (inappropriate and offensive) symbols and colors. The final step is to create the palette of symbols and colors that provide a range of culturally sensitive graphics at the same time identifying those that are insesitive and inappropriate and thus should be avoided.

4 Storytelling as Basis for Disaster Risk Communication

4.1 Narratives and Personal Experiences as Guides for Creating Meaningful Messages

Stakeholders’ participation and interaction with those crafting the communication material or those who are managing the risk adds a more authentic tone in communicating risks. Workshops, focused-group- discussions (FGDs), and surveys are often used but there is no substitute for a face-to-face conversation with people in a local area sharing their own stories, imbued with their hopes, aspirations, and fears, in dealing with their perceived risks given the hazards in their areas. The least effective but most often used form of stakeholder participation is the formal hearing or public meeting, for which the organization sets a time and place for the audience to present formal testimony, which is transcribed and used later in the risk management process (Lundgren and McMakin 2013. 227–250).

In the World Bosai Forum 2019, held in Sendai, Japan that I attended and participated in with colleagues from the university, I recall a high school student (now a professional) sharing her experience as a victim of the earthquake that shook Japan that fateful day of March 11, 2011—alternatively referred to as the 3.11 earthquake, the Great Sendai Earthquake, and the Great Tohoku Earthquake. Unfortunately, there was nothing humanly great about the earthquake as it was followed by a devastating tsunami that in combination laid waste to great part of that Pacific coast near the city of Sendai. Worse, it disabled the Fukushima Nuclear Plant laying radioactive waste in the area and causing fear and panic not only in Japan but other parts of the Pacific Basin. According to the student, she was witness to this carnage and loss of family members, but also witness to the resiliency of the human spirit to prevail against odds, and to aid others in dire need of help. I remember her relating how she was adopted by a foreign family—for her safety and education, and the care and kindness she received from elders and her peers. She made a promise to herself in not failing to narrate her experience on all possible occassions, and deliver her message of the need to prepare incessantly, so that people will pay attention to hazards, and will always be prepared. Her appeal to the intellect and to the emotion cannot be eclipsed by mere technical warnings, or warnings consisting of threats, or appeals based on fictional stories.

4.2 Hazard Maps and Individual Vulnerability Profiles

Individuals may take the initiative in learning about hazards. They may initiate learning for their personal benefit or for informing others. A good learning resource for this kind of study are hazard maps that are usually prepared for specific types of hazards such as typhoons, floods, volcanoes, and faultlines or combinations of related hazards, (i.e., typhoons and floods, volcanoes and faultlines). A hazard map is prepared using cartography conventions, so it should not be hard to learn and to understand them. However, the differentiated use of legends, indicating the different hazards’ levels of intensity or severity, are not the same which may hamper learning.

To the users of computers and mobile devices, an application called HazardHunterPH (URL: https://hazardhunter.georisk.gov.ph/) was launched in July 2019 where users of the platform can click on any part of the Philippine map and check on that area’s assessment in terms of susceptibility to ground shaking, lahar, flood, tsunami, etc., and its proximity to known volcanoes and faultlines. This takes care in part to understanding the technical aspects of the hazards. The significance may extend to the individual level if users can relate the hazards to their own perceptions of vulnerability so that flood, for instance, is not just a measurement in inches but a factor of “dread “ to the individual.

In an example, acceptable risk levels to flood may be different for Individual A from Indivdual B due to factors in height or competency in swimming, despite the fact thay they are similarly exposed. The result of this assessment can have many uses. One concept that I can use as an example is the creation of individial avatars (representing one’s personality type) that will start with a color, shape, and size, even in the general likeness of the user (the individual). By learning and implementing actions that will lessen the risks to the avatar—or say increase in its survival index, the colors, shapes, or even size may change in a desired way, Depending on the care (or abandonment) that the owner provides for the avatar, changes occur in a combination of ways. This way, the user may not only learn about good practices in risk mitigation but may practice them as well. This is just an example of a way by which current technologies and communication platforms, and the way people—especially the young ones—adopt technology and appropriate them for custom use. The avatar example is similar in a way to earlier trends, adopting pet rocks a generation ago, that was followed by the tamagochi craze, and then there was Picachu! This time, their pet is their avatar and they have to train their avatar the survival tricks neccessary to increase their life stream. They have to be provided with tasks that they need to do, and when fulfilled, the avatar is enhanced.

A presentation delivered by Dr. Tali Sharot in her TEDx Cambridge produced talk “How To Motivate Yourself To Change Your Behavior.” gives us a good idea on some ways of motivating people to be guided to a line of action. In the video, she indicated that age groups react to warnings differently. Learning from mistakes tend to be low at young age, raises up until age forty, and again declines in older years. This also translates to heeding warning signs (Sharot [n.d] 6:10–7:15). This perhaps explains in part why young people pick up smoking in teenage years despite warning signs on the label due to their low level of risk aversion.

Dr. Sharot further adds that people want to take in information that they want to hear more than information that they don’t. People feel better when they are presented with an improving image of themselves than when they’re presented with a negative image of themselves (Sharot, 07:15 -08:15). On the subject of individual avatars proposed earlier, the opportunity given to users in enhancing their avatars will correspondingly help them acquire knowledge of risk management best practices. The improvement in the avatars may just rub on to the users.

5 New Approaches and Creative Design Considerations in Developing Risk Communication Materials for Specific Hazards and Target Groups

5.1 Targeted vs Standardized Disaster Risk Communication Campaigns

Disaster Risk Communication cannot rely on standard and templated communication materials alone. This must be supplemented with materials that are designed specifically to target audiences. Targeted communication refers to the process of identifying a particular group or an audience that is assessed according to set of demographic criteria that my be based on the answers to the following types of questions:

• What does the audience do for a living?

• What is its income level?

• What is its typical age?

• What is the gender of the typical audience?

• What is the education level of the typical audience?

• Do they have children?

Classifying the audience to a set defined by these attributes provides the communicator with a direction in delivering an appropriate message or solution to the intended audience. It may appear that in risk communication, information disseminated to the public need not discriminate on the type of audience since the information is of technical nature. This is not so. Without a target audience, the message will be lost in the sea of diversity in the mental and emotional states of a “blind” audience. As in the advertising industry, a good practice is to develop different—even short (ranging in seconds) materials that are specifically designed for the different audiences. The best practice in this case is to conceptualize a design program that will map out for whom the communication material is intended for, and the overall message that the communication wishes to deliver, with a projection of a line of action that the receiver will undertake. For these materials to be successful, they are usually designed along the principles of dominance, frequency, and duration. This is referred to as a campaign, short for marketing or advertising campaign.

Campaign is indicated by “the groups of advertising messages which are similar in nature. They share same messages and themes placed in different types of media at some fixed times. The time frames of advertising campaigns are fixed and specifically defined.” (Advertising Campaigns 2019). Following this indicator, risk communication campaign then is a series of messages through media channels that share a single idea and theme. A communication campaign targets specific objectives using strategic visual content customized to the mindset of the target audience. It is creatively directed so that the content—visual, auditory, and at times tactile, typically does not require explanation to give context, relying instead on the impact of the overall experience to drive meaning. Campaigns may include graphic design, moving images, interactivity, music and sound effects, and other sensory devices to aid in the delivery of the message.

Interactivity in communication campaigns in particular is a relatively developing mode of information delivery system with increasing web- delivered and web-accessed content. It allows the receiver to respond making feedback tracking immensely more immediate than the traditional broadcast media such as television and radio. Interactivity means that the receiver may also share online content as well as collaborate in the creation of the content itself. This allows developers to design messages that entice the viewers to participate in the creation of content giving rise to information systems that are crafted by the participation of the crowd themselves and the messages are more meaningful among them. Visuals may also be in the form of moving images, and as claimed that a visually supported presentation is more persuasive than an unattended one by 43% (Vogel et al. 1966). (Many websites claim to an incredible visuals processing at 60,000 more times than text alone but these are largely unsubstantiated.) The use of moving images and sound will undoubtably increase the value of user experience, translating this to increased use and exposure to the messages. Constant exposure to the message will embed messages subconsciously for easier recall and learning consisting “of the acquisition of a new pattern of response (or behavior) without consciousness of the keys (stimuli, contingencies, or rules) that initiate or regulate it” (Partido 2012).

5.2 Using Dynamic and Multisensory Designs for Disaster Risk Communication

Multisensory learning approach is often used to teach children with learning disabilities. The approach appeal to a particular child’s area of sensory learning strength, sometimes called a learning style. This approach suggests that when students are taught using techniques consistent with their learning styles, they learn more easily, faster, and can retain and apply concepts more readily to future learning. Most students, with a disability or not, enjoy the engaging variety that multisensory techniques can offer (Logdon 2019).

The approach may also be applicable to communicating risks to children and young adults. A General Education (GE) course in the University of the Philippines Diliman named DRMAPS (Disaster Risk Mitigation, Adaptation, and Preparedness Strategies) applies multisensory techniques and has effectively enhanced class participation, understanding of technical principles, integrating and working with team members, and creating communication materials on hazards and risks.

Visual components often include a mix of visual teaching methods and strategies such as using:

• Text and/or pictures on paper, posters

• Illustrations in aid of narrative

• Creation of mind maps

• Using maps and organizing information pertaining to hazards

• Student-created art and images

• Creative work in a video container

Auditory techniques include:

• Recording ambient audio sounds in aid of narrative

• Creation of music, speaking rhymes

Kinesthetic methods include:

• Modeling hazard related scenes using their bodies with minimal props

• Games in acting out scenes flashed on screen

• Role playing (acting) in their video recording for their creative communication material

Multisensory techniques enable students to use their personal areas of strength to help them learn. In the DRMAPS context, students come from diverse disciplines and when grouped in teams, they can contribute to the team effort by drawing on their own creative and academic interest. Current multisensory techniques can be further enhanced by the introduction of new technologies in the digital area. 3D modeling, motion capture and virtual reality technologies have advanced to a degree that the total cost of their operation is within hobbyist level. Outside of creating content, these technologies can also ease creating programs that aid training. In immersive authoring systems, virtual reality developers build applications from within the virtual environment, an approach similar to visual programming. Programming elements are represented with 3D virtual objects, and direct 3D manipulation is used to assemble virtual scenes and specify object behaviors and attributes (Lee, Kim & Billinghurst, 79).

Fig. 17.6

Student of DRMAPS “role-play” by acting out and using a small amount of props to simulate a disaster. The class then process the image and seek out the highlights of the role-play in conjuction with the disaster. Depicted in this photo is an event of volcanic eruption

A digital sandbox is one example to this. This technological contraption that can easily be DIY (do-it-yourself) and is a very good way of making young people (but not exclusively so) learn about the nature and effects of climate change. “An augmented reality (AR) sandbox is a 3D, interactive, dynamic educational tool to help understand mapping, topography, and watersheds. It was created by Oliver Kreylos, Peter Gold, and M. Burak Yikilma, and uses a motion sensor and computer software to map contour lines and colors based on the real-time shape of the sand” (Augmented Reality Lesson 2019). The sandbox, for instance will show water virtually fillilng up the lower cavities of the sandpit if the sand mounds are reduced in height, or colors on the slopes show the possiblity of collapse as they are built up to a steep angle.

6 Conclusion

6.1 Designing Risk Communication Materials

What is the content and form, then, of an ideal communication material? There are models of communication that aid the communicator in understanding the basis of content creation considering the interplay of the components in a communication environment. There are software and digital technologies that aid the creation of media. These can integrate shapes, colors, and sounds, and to some extent, engage the tactile and olfactory senses. There are ways of making the receiver of information interact with the media to suit individual learning styles. By way of conclusion, the following is a proposed set of guides in crafting communication for an audience:

Study the audience. Collect information, observe audience attributes, and involve the audience as much as possible in crafting the communication material. Use local narratives, colors, and shapes, that the audience can relate to, and avoid use of the same to the ones that they dislike. Translate technical terms to words that relate to the audience’s experience. Check what information channels are available to them, and what they enjoy using the most. This channel, at the least, ushers a path for a relaxed communication exchange.

Adhere to standards when it is required. The set of standards for signs and signals exists for public order. Where standards are binding, observe them. But beware, some accepted standards and conventions are only influenced by industry and are not established by law. In this case, the so-called standards can be modified and translated to symbols that are closer to the audience’s realm of experience.

Use technologies that can work in the area. While the current level of technologies facilitates the authoring of creative media, the communication process can only work if the audience can receive and use the material as designed. Check communication delivery systems such as available transmission and projection systems, access to the internet, space, facilities, etc., to verify that the communication material will not be distorted by way of delivery. Note that the creation is not totally dependent on delivery. For example, a series of printed posters may be made using advanced imaging technologies but are not technology dependent in their display, or a complex topography map is produced through 3D printing but does not require special tools to manipulate it to a useful information media.

Allow the audience to interact with media. Stimulation through different senses—including movement—and interaction with the media and content facilitates learning. For instance, using digital media, engaging the audience in appreciating the communication media to the point where they may inject new information materials establishes their “stakeholder” posture and allows multiple points of data entry. The traffic navigational map Waze has made good use of crowdsourcing, some modified forms of user engagement—such as adding a layer with data vetting points —can be used for hazard maps. On the other hand, using manual or analog approach, the “stakeholders” may be engaged in creating murals or public art where they can impart their hopes and aspirations, as well as their most dreaded fears. These artworks need not be cast for posterity, but are continuously augmented, improved, or reconstructed, to better reflect their sentiments at any time.

An example of a successful interactive campaign fueled by contributions from viewers is the Department of Tourism’s “Its More Fun in the Philippines.” Launched by adman and erstwhile Secretary of the Department of Tourism Ramon “Mon J” Jimenez, the campaign features tourism destinations in the Philippines peppered with human interest as he declared “that his strategy will tap the growing power of social media. ‘Believe in the beauty of your country. Sell it at every turn. Sell it on Facebook, on Twitter, on Multiply’” (Albano 2020).

To this day, the “Its More Fun in the Philippines” site (https://www.itsmorefuninthephilippines.com/) receives viewer-contributed content from both local and foreign visitors. Photos and accompanying texts of their visits to different Philippine destinations are self-uploaded to the website for all the world to see. Without much curation effort, the site self-updates and self-promotes. Something similar but on the hazard side can be crafted. How about “Hazards Reveal In the Philippines” or “Beware: Extreme Fun” web portals to crowdsource “discovery” of hazards?

Hazards are poised like the Sword of Damocles of the ancient Romans, ever-present and looming, and can strike without warning. Some have been hanging around so long they have transmuted to a sight of awe—that mixed feeling of dread and relish. It is akin to staring down the mouth of a volcano, looking up at a jagged precipice, or being buffeted by giant waves—the kinds of experiences that exhilarate tourists. It is up to the communicator to craft how the population can relish in the delights the “hazards” bring but to prepare them for the havoc they can cause as well. The hazards may not be tamed, but the risks can be reduced.

Plan for a communication campaign. Planning campaigns that are audience-focused and time-sensitive ensures the appropriate use of resources. Campaigns are tactically short and focused but strategically protracted and extensive. Latch onto current trends, but explore original creations. Disrupting the mainstream but keeping on track of delivering the correct science behind the message is a creative challenge.

Hazards that suddenly become real—such as the COVID-19 pandemic—required immediate action and emergency policies that did not afford long discourses. Issues of pressing economic, political, and social concerns that are easily headline banners tend to bury issues of great importance but are creeping in slowly and with great impact, such as climate change. Climate change is such an encompassing topic that it dissolves into the background, even if easily, we can point a finger at climate change as the main culprit of the ills of our time. Take the earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, for example, or the typhoons and floods, even energy needs—and include the COVID-19 pandemic for good measure, Headline hogging events that have effectively sidelined the issue of climate change, and yet these events can relate to climate change. Presentations, items of text or video, or fora that discuss how all these things interrelate are so scarce and inconspicuous. It is time to see climate change as the stress that’s pulling apart the threads \of human existence. We may feel so small in the grandness of nature—especially when it starts acting up in ways that scares us, but cope with it we must. Climate change is the big window that opens to the grand vista of the world unfolding. The frames in this big window are our channels in communicating small chunks of information so we will not overload our audiences even as we deliver and receive information with urgency and at great speeds.