Disaster warnings can save lives only when people at risk receive, understand and act on them. The article highlights the need to shift disaster risk reduction from simply delivering warnings to ensuring that individuals can take protective action and receive assistance when necessary.
Written by environmental scientist and development professional Pramod Dabrase, the article introduces the concept of the Disability Disaster Rescue Management System (DRMS) 2.0 a proposed people centred approach designed to connect official disaster warnings with individuals current locations, accessibility needs and available support.
The article argues that sending an alert to a district, mobile phone or household does not guarantee safety. A warning becomes effective only when the person at risk understands the message, knows what action to take and can carry it out. Those who cannot evacuate independently must also be able to access appropriate assistance.
Different people face different disaster risks
The same disaster can affect people in different ways depending on their circumstances. For example, people who use wheelchairs may encounter inaccessible evacuation routes deaf people may miss audible alerts, and children may become separated from their caregivers during emergencies.
The article notes that disaster preparedness systems must account for these differences from the beginning. It cites the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s 2023 global survey, which received 6,342 responses from 132 countries and found limited progress in disability inclusion over the preceding decade.
It also highlights the challenges faced by migrants, visitors displaced people and other mobile populations. People may be far from their registered addresses when a disaster occurs and may lack knowledge of local hazards or emergency support services.
According to the article disaster risk management must therefore consider where people are currently located rather than relying solely on permanent addresses or administrative records.
DRMS 2.0 aims to connect warnings with assistance
The proposed DRMS 2.0 builds on the original Disability Disaster Rescue Management System, which explored how technology could help identify and locate persons with disabilities during emergencies and connect them with appropriate support.
The original concept received second prize in the 2022 ICT 4 Inclusion Challenge, organised by Atos and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). It was subsequently recognised by the Zero Project as a special entry Global Winning Project.
The expanded DRMS 2.0 approach aims to support a wider range of people who may need additional assistance including older people, children, pregnant women, people with health conditions, visitors and persons with disabilities.
The proposed architecture combines verified official warnings with consent based location information and accessibility requirements. It is designed to communicate risks in understandable formats, suggest feasible protective actions, mobilise personal or community support and escalate cases to authorised emergency responders when required.
Artificial intelligence could help provide multilingual communication accessible alerts, personalised guidance and decision support. However, Dabrase emphasises that AI should not independently declare a disaster, replace official warning agencies or remove human responsibility from important decisions.
The current DRMS 2.0 pilot is described as a controlled proof of concept, not an official emergency service.
Integration, safety and accountability are key priorities
The article states that many of the system’s proposed components already exist in disaster management, including hazard monitoring, geographic information systems, accessible communication and emergency response services. The proposed contribution of DRMS 2.0 is to integrate these capabilities around the individual so that a warning can lead to appropriate action and a verified outcome.
The approach draws on the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 the Early Warnings for All initiative, the Common Alerting Protocol and guidance on inclusive early warning systems and mobile populations.
The proposed pilot programme will assess whether the system can accurately match hazard information with people’s current locations, deliver accessible warnings, recommend practical actions and connect those needing help with the appropriate support networks.
It will also examine whether emergency requests reach the correct responders and whether cases can be closed through confirmed safety an accountable handover or a recorded resolution.
Privacy, consent, cybersecurity, data-sharing limits, connectivity challenges and the risks of inappropriate automation will also require careful evaluation.
Dabrase acknowledges that DRMS 2.0 has not yet produced population level evidence showing that it reduces disaster losses or prevents rescue situations. Such claims would require evidence from field testing.
Instead, the proposed pilot will measure practical indicators, including whether warnings were received and understood, whether recommended actions were feasible, whether assistance arrived, how quickly cases were resolved and whether outcomes were verified.
From early warnings to early action
The article concludes that advances in satellites, artificial intelligence, mapping systems and forecasting have significantly improved the ability to monitor hazards and communicate risks. However, technology alone cannot guarantee protection.
Governments disaster management authorities, technology organisations, researchers, humanitarian agencies, disability organisations and local communities must work together to ensure that warnings lead to timely and practical action.
The central question, according to the article, is no longer just whether a forecast was accurate or an alert was transmitted. It is whether people understood the warning, could act safely, received the support they needed and became safer as a result.
The article argues that disaster risk reduction will remain incomplete until warning systems are judged not only by their technological reach but also by their ability to protect the people they are designed to serve.