In just a few months, floods devastated both northern and southern Thailand, revealing a troubling truth: the country’s disaster response system is failing, and climate change is making it worse.

Thailand’s weak disaster management — from poor warnings to inadequate rescues — turns emergencies into preventable tragedies. As climate change worsens storms and floods, the damage will grow unless action is taken now to fix the broken system.

The dangers are real. From 2000 to 2019, Thailand faced 146 natural disasters, killing an average of 138 people each year and costing $7.7 billion (277.2 billion baht) — nearly 1% of the country’s GDP.

Floods are the most destructive. Over two decades, they killed more than 2,000 people and caused damage totalling $59 billion (2.124 trillion baht).

The recent northern floods were the worst in 80 years, causing damage of up to 60 billion baht and ranking among Thailand’s 10 costliest disasters. A month later, the South faced its worst flooding in decades, displacing thousands as waters continued to rise.

These disasters keep happening because Thailand lacks effective preventive measures to stop weather emergencies from becoming full-blown crises. As southern Thailand struggles with catastrophic flooding, questions linger: Why does this keep occurring?

Deep-rooted problems

Thailand’s flood problems stem from three main issues: centralised policies with poor coordination on the ground, outdated early warning systems, and insufficient funding with misplaced priorities.

Water management in Thailand is split between 48 agencies across 13 ministries, but their roles often overlap. For instance, both the National Water Resources Committee and the Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Committee deal with floods, yet they rarely work together. As a result of no clear leader in charge, inefficiency reigns during crises.

Thailand’s warning system is also unreliable. It lacks critical data on topography and land use, which are essential for flood prevention. Nearly half of the weather monitoring equipment fails to function consistently, and 96% has failed to fully report weather measurement results for at least one day.

Flood forecasts are only 33% accurate a day in advance, leaving communities vulnerable and unprepared. In many areas, warnings fail to reach residents because the SMS alert system is underdeveloped, and nearly half of the communication equipment doesn’t work.

State investment in risk reduction is poorly directed. Even though early warning systems can deliver a return of nine times the investment, most of the 2023 flood management budget was spent on building dams and drainage systems. Very little was allocated to improving warning systems or using data to prevent floods.

Lessons from Japan

Japan provides valuable solutions for overcoming these challenges.

The country’s disaster management uses decentralised decision-making, inter-agency collaboration, integrated data systems, and a focus on prevention. Local governments manage smaller emergencies, while the central government handles national crises. Both work under the same framework to ensure smooth coordination.

Apart from using cutting-edge digital technology such as virtual city models to assess and predict risks, Japan also has effective early warning systems like J-Alert that can notify the public in seconds through multiple channels, from loudspeakers, television, radio, email, and mobile phones.

Comprehensive early warnings, especially when issued at least 24 hours in advance, can reduce disaster damage by 30%. It’s a clear example of how proactive measures save lives and minimise losses.

Public education on disaster preparedness is also a priority in Japan. Regular drills and school programmes, including online classes and special courses for children, teach citizens how to respond in emergencies because preparation saves lives.

Thailand has its own example of effective flood management in the City of Hat Yai. Once a disaster hotspot, the city suffered devastating floods every decade. Today, it’s a success story, thanks to a mix of science, teamwork, and preparation.

Local success

Hat Yai’s Disaster Research Centre at Prince of Songkla University uses advanced models to assess risks and predict floods. Meanwhile, its disaster response working group manages early warnings, risk plans, and coordination with state agencies and local communities. Reporting directly to the governor, the working group acts as an effective decision support system, which enables timely and accurate responses to flood risks.

This collaborative approach, supported by committed volunteers and strong leadership, has saved lives and reduced damages. Hat Yai proves that preparation works.

Despite its success, even Hat Yai’s model has limits. Without consistent long-term funding, the research centre struggles with inadequate equipment and outdated data. Frequent staff turnover due to limited career opportunities also threatens the continuity of the working group, as does the regular transfer of governors. Expanding this approach across the country will need more resources and long-term support from the government.

Breaking the cycle

To break the cycle of flooding disasters, Thailand must shift its focus from reacting to crises to preventing them. This means improving coordination between national and local agencies and stopping unregulated land use in high-risk areas, which worsens the problem.

Following the Hat Yai model, flood-prone areas should work with local universities to establish disaster research centres. These centres can collect land use and topography data, analyse risks, and use advanced tools like virtual city models to plan preventive strategies. Learning from past mistakes will also help improve preparedness for future disasters.

Meanwhile, disaster response centres should take charge of risk plans, organise regular drills, invest in critical infrastructure, involve communities, implement effective warning systems, and manage evacuation, rescue, and recovery efforts.

At the national level, inter-agency coordination is lacking. Committees for water management and disaster prevention don’t work full-time or collaborate effectively, and no operational centre enforces their mandates. The government, therefore, must create full-time professional teams to oversee river basin management and support universities in setting up disaster research centres. International partnerships can also help improve warning systems and forecasts.

Passing laws to empower governors is equally important. Currently, governors lack the authority to coordinate all state agencies in their provinces, making disaster prevention and response difficult. Upgrading governors to “super CEOs” with greater authority and power would ensure more effective leadership.

The government must also address land use in flood-prone areas by regulating new developments, limiting existing ones, and removing structures with fair compensation. Proper zoning and planning can significantly reduce vulnerabilities.

“We cannot eliminate disasters, but we can mitigate risk. We can reduce damage. We can save more lives,” said Ban Ki-moon, former UN Secretary-General.

This is true for Thailand, which has seen the devastating impact of floods — lives lost, homes destroyed, and billions wasted. Yet, examples like Hat Yai and Japan show that preparation and coordination save lives and reduce losses. Floods are inevitable, but their destruction doesn’t have to be. Thailand must act decisively to end its cycle of inefficiency and prepare for the next storm. The question is, will it be ready?

Writer: Saowaruj Rattanakhamfu, PhD, is research director and Nuthasid Rukkiatwong is senior researcher at the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI).

Note: This article is adapted from the authors’ presentation on “Disaster Preparedness: Managing Natural Disaster Crises” at the 2024 TDRI Annual Public Conference on October 30, 2024.

First Published: Bangkok Post on December 18, 2024