A

s Indonesia aims to keep its annual economic growth above 5 percent, industrialized areas will be enlarged or probably multiplied in coming decades. With our many natural hazards, we should anticipate a combination of natural hazards and technological disasters.

Just recently, we have learned of the Tianjin port chemical explosion disaster in China, resulting in more than 100 casualties and uncontained chemical substance leakage.

Indonesia has its own examples where technology could potentially amplify the impact of natural disasters, such as the leakage of ammonia in a number of fertilizer companies at several places throughout Indonesia and explosions in petroleum compounds in Jakarta.

Arguably the Lapindo mud disaster was a combination of a natural hazard with a technological disaster. The areas around Sidorajo, East Java are still feeling the effects of this disaster.

These examples confirm the underlying threats posed by natural and technological disasters, not to mention isolated technologically induced disasters.

How will Indonesia cope with its emerging economic expansion amid an already frequent threat of natural hazards and technological disasters? And how can the risk be effectively communicated to the broader society outside of the factory gates? How will the establishment of industrial complexes gain the approval of the surrounding communities?

In June 2015, the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB) released the Indonesia Data on Disasters and revealed the disaster risk posed by technological disasters. There have been 32 events classified as technological disasters since 2001. These disasters caused 107 fatalities, more than 38,000 injuries and almost 15,000 refugees.

The recorded impacts of such technological disasters are likely just the tip of the iceberg. The classification of such incidents is still being debated among scientists and practitioners. Specifically, whether different events should be classified as disasters or only isolated incidents within particular factories or industrial compounds.

A number of transportation incidents could arguably be classified as technological disasters too. Regardless of the classification, the threat of combined natural and technological disasters in Indonesia is real.
___________________________________

To date, no practice to anticipate technological disasters is available in Indonesia .

According to the BNPB, the three provinces most vulnerable to such disasters since 2001 are the most populous provinces in Indonesia: East, Central and West Java. So far, little research and action has been done on these issues.

Although the BNPB has agreed to formulate a risk assessment for technological disasters, real action to reduce the risk is limited in terms of frequency and participation from stakeholders.

In certain industrial complexes, technological disasters have been anticipated through a number of standards such as ISOs, along with drills within the complexes.

There are few awareness-raising activities for this type of disaster involving communities outside the factory gates and emergency responders from local authorities.

To date, no practice to anticipate technological disasters is available in Indonesia that shows a comprehensive involvement of the stakeholders. It is hard to establish a social model involving the local authority, plant managers/owners, community, community-based organization, academia, and NGOs.

The risks exposed by technological disasters are only based primarily on guess-work for certain parties. Outside of the factory, technological disaster risk is only based on limited sources of information, often lacking clarification or any scientific basis. Should any incident turn into a disaster, a large number of uncertainties would arise.

One of which is, what would be things beyond the capacity of the plant'€™s safety unit to contain? Say an explosion occurred in one factory using chemical substances, the detail toxicity or safety data sheet of the chemical compounds would likely be unavailable for firefighters outside the factory complex.

In this case, how would the responders '€” the firefighters or the emergency unit '€” contain the explosion without harming their own personnel? Would leakage contaminate the water, the air, or the soil?

How should people around the factory respond during the first minutes of an emergency? Such information is not available for local authorities and, moreover, for people around the factory.

The process should start by informing people of the disaster risks that may arise out of the factory.

The openness of such information could indeed scare the community and backfire on industry. It could complicate the attractiveness of investment.

However the UN Environment Program (UNEP) has offered a method to increase preparedness toward disasters. The concept is called Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies at Local Level (APELL), introduced in 1988 after the Bhopal disaster in India.

This APELL concept contains of ten steps involving related stakeholders. This has been applied in a number of countries, such as in India, Thailand, and the Philippines. The APELL process has successfully brought stakeholders into one coordinating group where the openness of the disaster risk is fundamental. Indonesia has yet to adopt these practices.

Regardless of what method Indonesia will adopt, the real problem is how to increase the awareness of all stakeholders toward technological and natural disasters.

People around the factory should be informed of at least four matters. (1) The magnitude and impact of technological and natural-technological disasters posed by the factory. (2) Evacuation and protection methods in case of disaster. (3) Emergency communication should be traced so it is clear and quick. (4) Who will be the commander in the event of an emergency.

Local authorities must clearly know all of the above matters plus asses their emergency responders'€™ capacity to handle such situations.

This will only be known after close coordination with stakeholders and frequent drills to anticipate the disasters. As Indonesia has long been recognized for its susceptibility to natural hazards, anticipating and reducing risks from natural-technological disasters, and technological disasters, would help this country assure the safety of its industrial sectors as well as that of the surrounding people.

Without adequate preparation, the goal of 5 percent economic growth could be interpreted as the rate of increased risk of natural-technological and technological disasters in the country.
________________________________

The writer is the deputy of the Tsunami and Disaster Mitigation Research Center (TDMRC) and a lecturer at the Faculty of Civil Engineering, both under the state-run Syiah Kuala University in Banda Aceh.