an assessment of the disaster preparedness of thailand ... · 4.2 elements of natural disaster...

The Center for Economic and Business Forecasting, The University of Thai Chamber of Commerce

i

Executive Summary

The study on “An Assessment of the Disaster Preparedness of Thailand Small and Medium Size Enterprises” was aimed at assessing:

Natural Disaster Risks faced by SMEs in selected affected areas in two aspects: types of the risks and damages to businesses.

The status of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) in SMEs which included assessment of the organizational structure, personnel, knowledge and understanding of DRM and DRM-related government regulations for businesses, mechanisms for sharing DRM information within and outside the enterprise, and experience in the mitigation of natural disasters and

DRM training needs

The result of the study was drawn from the surveyed information of 429 SME operators in Thailand whose enterprises were located in the areas that had ever been struck by natural disasters. These were Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya province- Central Part of Thailand, Ubon Ratchathani- Northeastern, Chiang Rai and Phisanulok- Northern, and Songkhla and Phuket- Southern Part of Thailand.

The majority of the respondents were small business operators. Most of the surveyed

operators were in the sector of Hotels and Restaurants, next were Transportation and Communication, Food and Beverages, Metal Products, Rubber and Plastics Products, Machinery and Electronic Appliances and Television and Communication, consecutively. 1. Degree of Natural Disaster Risk and Devastating Impact It was found that during the past ten years (2002-2012) 47.8% of the business enterprises had averagely been struck by the natural disaster once/twice a year. The disaster averagely lasted 23-24 days. The damage loss was averagely 3.6 million baths. The natural disaster that most of businesses had encountered was inland flooding with the “high” degree of damage/loss. When focusing on the business location, the enterprises in Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya were the worst adversely natural disaster impacted and the degree of damage/loss was high. Earnings was identified as the most massive damage/loss of the business, second was the cost of disaster mitigation and third was the damage/loss of buildings/cultivating lands consecutively.


ii

2. Disaster Devastating Impact Assessment The majority of the respondents envisaged the potential natural disaster in the country,

regional sections and provinces with the “moderate” to “high” degree of the devastating impact on businesses.

3. Perception and Natural Disaster Assessment

Focusing on the business vulnerability to being struck by natural disaster according to its location, most of the businesses were jeopardized to Inland Flooding, next were Earthquake, Drought and Tropical Cyclone, consecutively.

The study on the level of business preparedness from the perspective of tracing news/information about the natural disaster revealed that the tracing news/information by the majority of businesses was at the moderate degree. Television was the channel being traced the most, next was internet and newspaper.

4. Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business

4.1 Natural Disaster Management Plan On the enquiry whether the business had plan for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) it

was found that 73.2% of business had no plan for DRM. The reasons were that found no necessity, Lack/inadequacy of knowledgeable personnel/experts, Lack of understanding, Lack of tools, and Lack of resources.

4.2 Elements of Natural Disaster Preparedness Four elements of Natural disaster Preparedness were assessed: Preparedness

Assessment, Natural Disaster Prevention Planning, Staff Training and Asset Prevention and Risk Insurance. The results were presented in percentage and the average preparedness level of the full 6 point score. The meaning of the range of the average scores were as follows: 5.155 – 6.000 denoted the most preparation, 4.324 – 5.154 high preparation, 3.493 – 4.323 moderate preparation, 2.662 – 3.492 little preparation, 1.831 – 2.661 very little preparation and 1.000 – 1.830 no preparation at all.

From the study it could be concluded that of all the four elements of Natural Disaster

Preparedness Thai entrepreneurs’ readiness was low to very low and among these aspects the highest level of preparedness was Natural Disaster Prevention with an average score of 3.231.


iii

Levels of Preparedness of Thai Entrepreneurs

5. Natural Disaster Vulnerability Assessment

On account of the overall potentiality of business in coping with natural disasters, the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.764. Among these potentials, the operators’ potentiality for Natural Disaster Risk Insurance was higher than others.

Degrees of Potentiality Not at all

(%) Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

Natural Disaster Risk Insurance 23.8 23.3 25.9 27.1 3.299 Warning system when the disaster strikes. 34.6 20.7 18.6 26.1 3.033 Target place/land to evacuate people to 33.9 23.5 15.1 27.5 3.026 Disaster watch-dog networking 39.3 17.9 19.5 23.3 2.882 Equipment, devices, vehicles being made ready in case of evacuation

33.8 27.7 18.5 20.0 2.852

Effective risk prevention methods being taught to staff 30.8 38.4 23.1 7.8 2.631 Staff’s competency to handle the calamity timely and efficiently.

32.2 41.4 17.8 8.6 2.565

Operation Mechanism to minimize loss already being created

33.8 37.6 22.1 6.6 2.549

Budget allocated for the disaster 34.9 37.0 21.8 6.3 2.536 Natural Disaster Knowledge Management being established in your business.

31.9 41.1 21.7 5.2 2.522

DRM knowledgeable/skilful personnel 35.4 39.1 17.1 8.4 2.511 2.764

2.919

3.231

2.404

2.918 0123456

Preparedness Assessment

Natural Disaster Prevention Planning

Staff Training

Asset prevention and Risk Insurance


iv

6. Natural Disaster Management (DRM) Training Need Assessment 6.1 The Business’ Knowledge on Natural Disaster Management The study showed that most of the operators (73.1%) had never known or heard about

Disaster Risk Management (DRM); only 26.9% had known/heard before. 6.2 DRM Training/Seminar It was revealed that 86.9% of the operators had never attended any DRM training; only

13.1% had. However, 71.7% of the operators were interested to attend the training/seminar on Disaster Risk Management (DRM) if it was organised. The topics that they required to be trained most were Natural Disaster Preparedness Planning, next were Natural Disaster Mitigation Planning, Natural Disaster Management, and Natural Disaster Risk/Loss Assessment consecutively

Operators in medium business enterprise required more training than those in the small enterprise. Businesses in Hotels and Restaurants wanted more training/seminar than those in other sectors.

The appropriate training techniques proposed by the respondents were lecture and workshop and the suitable duration of the training/seminar was 1-2 day/s. 77.1% of the operators were willing to attend the training/seminar.

6.3 Levels of Confidence to Cope With the Natural Disaster The majority of the operators had “moderately” confidence, while the second largest had

“high” confidence that DRM knowledge would assist them to efficiently coping with the disaster and administrating their businesses.


v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i TABLE OF CONTENTS v INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Objective 2 Scope of Work 2 Methodology 3 An Assessment of the Disaster Preparedness of Thailand Small and Medium

Size Enterprises 6

1. Basic Information 7 2. Degree of Natural Disaster Risk and Devastating Impact 10 3. Disaster Impact Assessment 19 4. Perception and Natural Disaster Assessment 20 5. Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business 22 6. Natural Disaster Vulnerability Assessment 34 7. Natural Disaster Management (DRM) Training Need Assessment 37 APPENDICE


vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page 1 The distribution of the samples according to locations/provinces 2 2 Number of business classified by type of business and the location/province 4 3 Natural Disaster Devastating Impact Classified by Province 6 4 Types of Natural Disaster and Degree of Devastating Impact 8 5 Physical and Emotional Devastating Impact on the Inhabitants/Family

Members 9

6 Types of Damage/Loss to Business and Degree of Devastating Impact on Business

12

7 Causes of the Natural Disaster Devastating Impact on the Business 14 8 Potential Natural Disaster and Its Devastating Impact on Business 14 9 Types of Potential Disaster and Levels of Anxiety 17 10 Preparedness Assessment 21 11 Natural Disaster Prevention Planning 24 12 Staff Training 26 13 Asset prevention and Risk Insurance 27 14 The business potentiality in coping with naturaral disasters 30 15 DRM Training Requirement and DRM Content classified according to

Types, Size of Business and Office Location 35

16 DRM Training/Seminar Techniques 36 17 Willingness to Attend DRM Training/Seminar 37


vii

LIST OF CHART

Chart Page 1 Basic Information 3 2 Size of labor force 5 3 Natural Disaster Devastating Impact 5 4 Recovery Periods from Emotional and Physical Symptoms 9 5 The Blockage of Business Operations in Consequence of Natural Disasters 13 6 Levels of Anxiety about Business Being Struck by Potential Natural Disaster 15 7 The Tracing of Information/News about Natural Disaster 15 8 Information Tracing Channels 16 9 Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business 17 10 Natural Disaster Management Plan 18 11 The Practicality of DRM Plan 19 12 Levels of Preparedness of Thai Entrepreneurs 27 13 Natural Disaster Management Cooperation with Local Government 28 14 The Entrepreneurs’ Opinion on Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness 29 15 The Understanding of Warning Signals/Procedures stated in the Business’

Disaster Risk Management Plan 31

16 The Business’ Knowledge Background on Natural Disaster Management 32 17 The Necessity of Natural Disaster Management Training for the Business 32 18 The Business’ Backgound of DRM Training/Seminar Attendence 33 19 DRM Training/Seminar Requirement and DRM Content 34 20 Duration of DRM Training/Seminar 36 21 Communication Channels to Get DRM information 37 22 Levels of Confidence to Cope With the Natural Disaster 38


1

INTRODUCTION

1. Background Thailand suffers every year from many types of natural disasters, including floods,

tsunamis, storms, droughts, landslides, forest fire, earthquakes, and epidemics. The 2009 Global Assessment Report estimates that from 1980 – 2010 there have been 105 natural disasters, nearly 12,000 people have been killed, over 64,154,322 people have been affected and the economic damage per year is estimated to be $194,282,000 USD.

The most common natural disasters in Thailand are flooding and drought. Floods are a common occurrence in Thailand and many communities have learnt to adapt to annual flooding events. However, Thailand experiences more extreme flooding events. For example, in 2011 Thailand experienced the worst flooding in 50 years. Sixty-five of Thailand’s 77 provinces were impacted during the floods and the World Bank estimated that the economic loss was approximately 1.4 trillion THB (45.7 billion USD), which makes the 2011 floods one of the costliest natural disaster in modern history. Droughts have also had a significant impact on the country. In April 2012, 42 of the 77 province were considered to be drought disaster zones and over a 100,000 households have been affected. Drought can also cause large economic losses; the 2005 drought event caused an economic loss of $420 million.

Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) are one of the leading group of economic

activities and provide a substantial part of Asia Pacific regions economic activities. In Thailand, Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) make up 99% of the total business enterprises and the number is increasing with SMEs growing annually (3.6 percentage for small-sized and 9.8% for medium). Their contribution to the Gross Domestic Production (GDP) amounted to approximately 40%1.

Thailand is aware of the potential dangers from natural disasters and there have been many initiatives started to help the industrial sector prepare, adapt and respond. Unfortunately, SMEs are often excluded or forgotten from these initiatives. Therefore SMEs do not have adequate information or contingency plans for risks associated with natural disasters. Given that community resilience depends greatly on the ability of the private sector to bounce back,

1 Weerasiri, S. and Zhengang, Z 2012, ‘ Attitudes and Awareness towards Environmental Management and its Impact on Environmental Management Practices (EMPs) of SMEs in Sri Lanka’ Journal of Social and Development Sciences Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 16-23.


2

re-establish production and continue to provide employment to local workers in the aftermath of disasters, SME disaster preparedness and response is critical. 2. Objective

To conduct a survey to assess the disaster preparedness of Thailand’s SMEs in selected geographic areas. The assessment will focus on:

Risks faced by SMEs in selected natural disaster affected areas: assessment of the type of disasters that frequently cause damage to businesses and the different types and causes of damage to businesses such as the interruption to supply of materials and the disruption of production among others.

The status of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) in SMEs: assessment of the organizational structure, personnel, knowledge and understanding of DRM and DRM-related government regulations for businesses, mechanisms for sharing DRM information within and outside the enterprise, and experience in the mitigation of natural disasters.

DRM training needs. 3. Scope of Work

3.1 Geographic areas: The survey will focus on six geographic areas that have experienced natural disasters.

The geographic areas have been selected across Thailand and cover different types, frequency and impacts of natural disasters. The key geographic areas are:

Phitsanulok Province Ubon Ratchathani Province Chiang Rai Province Songkhla Province Phuket Province Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya Province


3

3.2 Types of Business The SMEs sectors have been selected based on the: Percentage of employment SMEs support2; SMEs that are vulnerable to natural disasters; and SMEs prevalent in the key

geographic areas. The sectors are listed in Table:

Sectors % of SME employment in overall sector Electrical Appliances and Electronics 27.7% Plastic 69.7% Metal 74.9% Technology and Communications 93.9% Tourism 98.5% Transportation and logistics 85.9% Agriculture and Food 89.9% 4. Methodology

4.1 Sample Size: 400 of samples are drawn from different geographic areas as shown below:

Geographic Areas Amount of Enterprise Percentage (%) Sample Size Ayutthaya Province 34,388 14.1 57 Ubon Ratchathani Province 51,235. 21.0 84 Chiang Rai Province 44,984 18.5 74 Songkhla Province 48,176 19.8 79 Phitsanulok Province 29,554 12.1 49 Phuket Province 35,104 14.4 58 243,441 100.0 400

2 Kenan Institute Asia, 2010, ‘Thailand SME Sectors and the Proposed ASEAN-EU FTA: Winners, losers and policy recommendations’ .


4

4.2 Types of business GDP SMEs Percentage (%) Sample Size

Food and Beverages 205,069.30 17.76 71 Rubber and Plastic Products 67,023.70 5.80 23 Metal Products 73,963.40 6.41 26 Machinery and Electrical Appliances 34,199.40 2.96 12 Television and Communication Equipment 25,406.70 2.20 9 Transportation and Communication 266,821.30 23.11 92 Hotels and Restaurants 482,122.60 41.76 167 1,154,606.40 100.00 400

4.3 Survey Method In the study, the data collection is mainly focused on interview survey. Two main

interview methods is used Telephone Interview. 4.4 Questionnaire Components The result of An Assessment of the Disaster Preparedness of Thailand Small and

medium Size Enterprises is based on the following information drawn from each questionnaire components:

Part 1. General information Name, type of the enterprises, number of employees, business location and the past

disaster damaging effects, etc. are inquired. Part 2. The Past Disaster Impact Assessment In this part, the past damaging impacts on the enterprises will be assessed. The

inquiry is on the duration of the hazard, the damaging effects. The damaging experience asked includes the loss of the machinery, apparatus, the disruption of production or the interruption to supply of materials etc.

Part 3. The Present Disaster Impact Assessment The natural change which may disrupt or interrupt the business operation will be

asked. Part 4. Disaster Risk Assessment The disaster risk on the business operation is assessed. The questions will be about

the risk of the locations on which the enterprises are situated, the experience about the past disaster risk, the probability of the disaster etc.


5

Part 5. Disaster Preparedness Assessment The questions will be about the preparedness, the types of disaster preparedness

etc. Part 6. Capacity Assessment

In this part, the inquiry will be on the enterprise’s planning, together with its capacity to face the disaster and manage the adverse conditions etc.

Part 7. The Assistance Need Assessment The needs for preparedness assistances such as the training, update information,

infrastructure or concepts for disaster prevention etc. are asked.

4.5 The Analysis Methods The data will be processed by mainly using the analysis of Frequency, Percentage, Cross

tabulations including the collection of the information -the enterprises’ needs and the problems-- which gain from the open ended questions.


6

An Assessment of the Disaster Preparedness of Thailand Small and Medium Size Enterprises

The result of Disaster Preparedness of SME enterprises in the study was drawn from the information surveyed from 429 Thailand SME enterprises situated on Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya province- Central Part of Thailand, Ubon Ratchathani- Northeastern, Chiang Rai and Phisanulok- Northern, and Songkhla and Phuket- Southern Part of Thailand. The report is organized in the following sections:

Basic information Degree of Natural Disaster Risk and Devastating Impact Disaster Impact Assessment Perception and Natural Disaster Assessment Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business Natural Disaster Vulnerability assessment Natural Disaster Management (DRM) Training Need Assessment


7

Section 1: Basic Information The data from the study were drawn from 429 SME operators in Thailand of which 87 were those whose business located in Ubon Ratchathani, 84 Chiang Rai, 53 Phitsanulok, 83 Songkhla, 64 Phuket, and 58 Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya. (Table 1)

Table 1 The distribution of the samples according to locations/provinces Province Number Percentage (%)

Ubon Ratchathani 87 20.3 Chiang Rai 84 19.6 Phitsanulok 53 12.4 Songkhla 83 19.3 Phuket 64 14.9 Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya 58 13.5

Total 429 100.0 Source: from the Survey Basic information of the questionnaire respondents:

- 69.7% were female and 30.3% male. - 23.0% were proprietors and 77.0% employees - 76.1% were small enterprises while 23.9% are medium. - When focusing on the types of business, 42.4% were Hotels and

Restaurants, 21.9% Transportation and Communication, 17.7% food and Beverages, 6.3% Metal Products, 5.8% Rubber and Plastics Products, 3.5% Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 2.3% Television and Communication. (Chart 1)


8

Chart 1 Basic Information Gender Position

Business Size Types of Business

Source: from the Survey

When further studying on types of business in the perspective of its location/province, it was found that:

- Among the total of 87 operators sampled from Ubon Ratchathani, 36 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 19 in Transportation and Communication, 17 Food and Beverages, 5 Rubber and Plastics Products, 5 Metal Products, 3 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 2 in Television and Communication.

- Among the total of 84 operators sampled from Chiang Rai, 41 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 17 in Transportation and Communication, 13 Food and Beverages, 4 Rubber and Plastics Products, 5 Metal Products, 2 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 2 in Television and Communication.

- Among the total of 53 operators sampled from Phitsanulok, 20 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 13 in Transportation and Communication, 10 Food and Beverages, 3 Rubber and Plastics Products, 3 Metal Products, 2 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 2 in Television and Communication

Male30.3%

Female69.7%

Owner23.0%

Staff77.0%

Medium Size

23.9

Small Size 76.1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

17.7

5.8

2.3

6.3

3.5

21.9

42.4

Food and Beverages

Rubber and Plastic Products

Television and Communication

Metal Products

Machinery and Electronic Appliances

Transportation and Communication

Hotels and Restaurants

(%)


9

- Among the total of 83 operators sampled from Songkhla, 33 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 18 in Transportation and Communication, 14 Food and Beverages, 6 Rubber and Plastics Products, 6 Metal Products, 4 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 2 in Television and Communication

- Among the total of 64 operators sampled from Phuket, 28 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 13 in Transportation and Communication, 12 Food and Beverages, 4 Rubber and Plastics Products, 4 Metal Products, 2 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 1 in Television and Communication

- Among the total of 58 operators sampled from Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya, 24 SMEs operators were in Hotels and Restaurants, 14 in Transportation and Communication, 10 Food and Beverages, 3 Rubber and Plastics Products, 4 Metal Products, 2 Machinery and Electronic Appliances and 1 in Television and Communication

Table 2 Number of business classified by type of business and the location/province Ubon

Ratchathani Chiang

Rai Phitsa nulok

Songkhla Phuket Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya

Total

Food and Beverages 17 13 10 14 12 10 76 Rubber and Plastics Products

5 4 3 6 4 3 25

Television and Communication

2 2 2 2 1 1 10

Metal Products 5 5 3 6 4 4 27 Machinery and Electronic Appliances

3 2 2 4 2 2 15

Transportation and Communication

19 17 13 18 13 14 94

Hotels and Restaurants 36 41 20 33 28 24 182 Total 87 84 53 83 64 58 429


- Considering the size of business according to its labor force, it was found that most of the surveyed enterprises were small enterprises, that is, 45.9% of surveyed enterprises hired 1-5 employees, 12.2% 16-24 ,8% 26-30, and 10.1% hired 31-50 employees, while there were 23.9% of the enterprises which hired 51-200 employees.

- Most of the labor force were male (52.2%) and 47.8% were female. (Chart 2)


10

Chart 2 Size of labor force


Section 2: Degree of Natural Disaster Risk and Devastating Impact

Natural disaster risk and devastating impact on SME enterprises were as follows: 2.1 Natural Disaster Devastating Impact

It was found that during the past ten years (2002-2012) 47.8% of the business enterprises had averagely been struck by the natural disaster (Chart 3) once/twice a year. The disaster averagely lasted 23-24 days/ 1 months. The damage loss was averagely 3.6 million baths.

Chart 3 Natural Disaster Devastating Impact


Numbers of employee

Numbers of employee

Percentage(%)

- employees - employees - employees - employees - employees

Total

5

male 52.2

female 47.8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

During the past years, your business has been adversely effected by any natural disaster?

Frequency: 1-2 per year

Duration of the disaster 23-24 days

NO 52.2%

Yes 47.8%

Damages/loss 3.6 million baht


11

When classified the devastating impact according to the business locations/provinces, it was found that:

91.2% of the enterprises in Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya had experienced the natural disaster devastating impact averagely once a year. The disaster averagely lasted 8-9 days and the damage/loss was averagely 0.91 million baths.

68.7% of the enterprises in Songkhla had experienced the natural disaster devastating impacts once-twice a year and the disaster averagely lasted 36-37 days. The damage/loss was averagely 0.59 million baths.

42.9% of the enterprises in Chiang Rai had experienced the natural disaster devastating impact once-twice a year and the disaster averagely lasted 9-10 days. The damage/loss was averagely 0.43 million baths.

40.6% of the enterprises in Phuket had experienced the natural disaster devastating impacts once-twice a year and the disaster averagely lasted 9-10 days. The damage/loss was averagely 6.21 million baths.

24.1% of the enterprises in Ubon Ratchathani had experienced the natural disaster devastating impacts once-twice a year and the disaster averagely lasted 15-16 days. The damage/loss was averagely 1.27 million baths.

23.1% of the enterprises in Phitsanulok had experienced the natural disaster devastating impact once-twice a year, and the disaster averagely lasted 37-38 days. The damage/loss was averagely 0.21 million baths.

It was found that the enterprises in Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya had been the worst adversely natural disaster impacted. The second and third worst adversely natural disaster impacted had been on those in Songkhla and Chiang Rai consecutively. (Table 3)

Table 3 Natural Disaster Devastating Impact Classified by Province

Province Effected by Natural Disaster

Frequency (per year)

Duration of the disaster (days)

Damages/loss (million baht)

No Yes Ubon Ratchathani 75.9 24.1 1-2 15-16 1.27 Chiang Rai 57.1 42.9 1-2 9-10 0.43 Phitsanulok 76.9 23.1 1-2 37-38 0.21 Songkhla 31.3 68.7 1-2 8-9 0.91 Phuket 59.4 40.6 1-2 9-10 6.21 Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya 8.8 91.2 1 23-24 8.91 Source: from the Survey


12

2.2 Types of Natural Disaster From the interview with the operators who had been struck by the natural

disaster on the issues of type and degrees of the devastating impact, it was revealed that: Earthquake: 27.7% of the operators had been struck by

earthquake with 60.0% of the group being suffered in the degree of ‚Very little‛. Inland Flooding: 71.8% of the operators had been hit by inland

flooding with 47.3% of them being suffered in the degree of ‚High‛. Coastal Flooding: Only 13.1% of the operators had been struck

by coastal flooding with 74.1% of them being suffered in the degree of ‚Very little‛. Landslides: 13.6% of the operators had been destroyed by

landslides with 82.1% of them being suffered in the degree of ‚Very little‛. Tropical Cyclone: 18.9% of the operators had been struck by

tropical cyclone with 46.2% of them being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree. Drought: Only 15.5% of the operators had been affected by

drought with 62.5% of the group being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree. Tsunami: 20.4% of the operators had been struck by Tsunami

with 47.3% of them being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree. Flash Flooding: Only 13.6% of the operators had been hit by

flash flooding with 75.0% of the group being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree. Storms: 15.0% of the operators had been struck by storms with

74.4% of them being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree. Forest Fire: 13.7% of the operators had been struck by forest fire

with 47.3% of them being suffered in the ‚Very low‛ degree.


13

Table 4 Types of Natural Disaster and Degree of Devastating Impact Percentage (%)

Types of Natural Disaster

% of business

Degrees of Devastating Impact

Very low Low Moderate High Very High

Earthquake 27.7 60.0 21.8 14.5 3.6 - Inland Flooding 71.8 3.4 11.5 24.3 47.3 13.5 Coastal Flooding 13.1 74.1 14.8 7.4 3.7 - Landslides 13.6 82.1 14.3 3.6 - - Tropical Cyclone 18.9 46.2 17.9 23.1 10.3 2.6 Drought 15.5 62.5 9.4 18.8 6.3 3.1 Tsunami 20.4 45.2 26.2 16.7 9.5 2.4 Flash flooding 13.6 75.0 10.7 - 14.3 - Storms 15.0 74.2 6.5 19.4 - - Forest Fire 13.7 89.3 7.1 - 3.6 - Source: from the Survey

2.3 Physical and Emotional Devastating Impact on the Inhabitants/Family

Members The Natural Disaster also had devastating impacted upon emotional and

physical conditions of the entrepreneurs’ inhabitants or family members. Stress: 36.1% of the operators answered that their

inhabitants/family members were highly suffered from stress, 31.7% moderately and only 7.2% no suffered at all.

Anxiety: 39.4% of the operators answered that their inhabitants/family members were highly suffered from anxiety, 30.3% moderately and only 6.7% no suffered at all.

Misery: 37.2% of the operators answered that their inhabitants/family members were highly suffered from misery, 30.9% moderately and only 7.2% no suffered at all.

Injury: 32.0 % of the operators answered that their inhabitants/family members were severely suffered from injury, 26.7% moderately and only 7.3% no injury at all.


14

Table 5 Physical and Emotional Devastating Impact on the Inhabitants/Family Members Percentage (%)

Not at all Very little little Moderate High Very High stress 7.2 6.7 10.1 31.7 36.1 8.2 anxiety 6.7 6.7 11.5 30.3 39.4 5.3 misery 7.2 7.2 10.6 30.9 37.2 6.8 injury 7.3 7.3 12.6 26.7 32.0 14.1 Source: from the Survey

When focusing on the recovery period from the emotional/physical symptoms mentioned above, it was found that 47.6% of the casualties could recover immediately after the disaster subsided, 37.4% needed 1-3 months to recover and 1.5% could not recover at all. (Chart 4)

Chart 4: Recovery Periods from Emotional and Physical Symptoms


immediately after the disaster subsided 47.6%

1-3 months 37.4%

3-6 months 9.7%

6-12 months 2.9%

12-18 months 1.5%

no recovery at all 1.0%


15

2.4 Types and Degree of Damage/Loss The types and degrees of damage/loss due to natural disaster were as

follows: 70.4% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of

buildings/cultivating lands and the degree of damage/loss of 30.3% of the operators were high, 29.7% moderate and 19.3% low.

54.3% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of equipments/machineries and the degrees of damage/loss of 36.3% of the operators were high, 24.8% very high and 16.8% moderate.

58.7% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of devices/office supplies and the degrees of damage/loss of 34.4% of the operators were high, 19.7% very high and 18.9% moderate.

55.1% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of commodities/goods in stock and the degrees of damage/loss of 38.6% of the operators were high, 18.4% moderate and 17.5% low.

56.8% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of raw materials and the degrees of damage/loss of 31.6% of the operators were high, 24.8% moderate and 19.7% very highly.

65.7% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of manufacturing blockage and the degrees of damage/loss of 36.8% of the operators were high, 23.5% moderate and 20.6% very high.

83.6% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of earnings and the degrees of damage/loss of 38.2% of the operators were high, 26.6% very high and 22.0% moderate.

68.9% of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of purchasing orders and the degrees of damage/loss of 35.9% of the operators were high, 28.9% moderate and 17.6% very highly.

56.9% of of the operators were suffered from the damage/loss of production capital and the degrees of damage/loss of 32.8% of the operators were moderate, and 27.6% high.

53.4% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of raw materials source and the degrees of damage/loss of 33.9% of the operators were moderate, 23.9% high and 22.9% low.


16

56.8% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of cost of disaster prevention and the degrees of damage/loss of 35.9% of the operators were moderate, 23.9% high and 24.8% low.

70.9% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of cost of disaster mitigation and the degrees of damage/loss of 34.2% of the operators were high, 30.8% moderate and 14.4% low.

65.5% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of wages and the degrees of damage/loss of 39.3% of the operators were moderate, 27.4% high and 16.3%low.

65.0% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of infrastructure (running water/electricity/telephone) and the degrees of damage/of 38.1% of the operators were moderate, 34.36 high and 13.4% low.

55.6% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of logistics system and the degrees of damage/loss of impact of 37.7% of the operators were moderate, 23.7% low and 19.3% high.

64.7% of the entrepreneurs were suffered from the damage/loss of factory/machinery restoration cost and the degrees of damage/loss of 31.8% of the operators were moderate, 27.3% high and 17.4% low.

From the study the operators identified that earnings was the most massive damage/loss of the business, the second was the cost of disaster mitigation and the damage/loss of buildings/cultivating lands consecutively. (Table 6)


17

Table 6 Types of Damage/Loss to Business and Degree of Devastating Impact on Business Percentage (%)

Destruction Areas

Degree of Devastating Impact

No Yes Very Low

Low Moderate High Very high

Buildings/ Cultivating Lands 29.6 70.4 10.3 19.3 29.7 30.3 10.3 Equipments/Machineries 45.7 54.3 10.6 11.5 16.8 36.3 24.8 Devices/ Office Supplies 41.3 58.7 13.9 13.1 18.9 34.4 19.7 Commodities/Goods in Stock 44.9 55.1 10.5 17.5 18.4 38.6 14.9 Raw Materials 43.2 56.8 12.8 11.1 24.8 31.6 19.7 Manufacturing Blockage 34.3 65.7 8.1 11.0 23.5 36.8 20.6 Earnings 16.4 83.6 5.8 7.5 22.0 38.2 26.6 Purchasing Orders 31.1 68.9 5.6 12.0 28.9 35.9 17.6 Production Capital 43.1 56.9 12.1 15.5 32.8 27.6 12.1 Raw Materials Source 46.6 53.4 15.6 22.9 33.9 23.9 3.7 Cost of Disaster Prevention 43.2 56.8 12.0 24.8 35.9 23.9 3.4 Cost of Disaster Mitigation 29.1 70.9 13.0 14.4 30.8 34.2 7.5 Wages 34.5 65.5 10.4 16.3 39.3 27.4 6.7 Infrastructure (Running water/ electricity/telephone)

35.0 65.0 7.5 13.4 38.1 34.3 6.7

Logistics System 44.4 55.6 13.2 23.7 37.7 19.3 6.1 Factory/Machinery Restoration Cost

35.3 64.7 7.6 17.4 31.8 27.3 15.9


2.5 The Blockage of Business Operations in Consequence of Natural Disasters

From the response to the question whether the respondents’ business had ever totally been blocked due to the natural disasters and whether they were able to operate their business, 68.1% of the operators could manage the operation even though they were struck by the natural disasters. Only 31.9% was not able to do so. (Chart 5)


18

When further asking those operators whose operations were blocked of their solutions to solve the problem, the answers were: hiring other manufacturing firms, purchasing from other traders and delivering the mechandise to the customers and delaying the delivery (paying for a fine). However, there were some operators who were unable to fix the problem.

Chart 5 The Blockage of Business Operations in Consequence of Natural Disasters

Source: from the Survey 2.6 Causes of the Natural Disaster Devastating Impact From the survey on causes of the natural disaster devastating impact on the business, the two major causes identified by equal ratio of the operators, that is, 29.8% each were Negligence/disregard the benefit of Natural Disaster Risk Management(DRM) and No particular DRM plan even though being aware of its importance. The second majority of the answer was that they did have plan but it was not effective due to the severity of the disaster. 13.6% were miscellaneous e.g.Vague/Imprecise information from state agency, Lack of good planning. (Table 7)

Have the operations of your business ever been totally blocked because of the natural disasters?

Yes 31.9%

Naver 68.1%

Your solution Hire other manufacturing firmsPurchase from other trader then deliver them to the buyerCannot fix the problemDelay the delivery pay for a fine


19

Table 7 Causes of the Natural Disaster Devastating Impact on the Business

Percentage (%)

Negligence/ Disregard the benefit of Natural Disaster Risk management (DRM) 29.8 Aware of the importance of DRM but there is no particular plan 29.8 Have plan but it was not affective due to the severity of the disaster 26.7 Others e.g. Vague/not precise information from state agency, Lack of good planning 13.6


Section 3: Disaster Impact Assessment

3.1 Potential Natural Disaster and Its Devastating Impact on Business In the study the operators were asked to assess the potential natural

disaster in the country, regional sections and provinces together with envisaging the degree of the natural disaster impact on business.

The potential disaster in Thailand: 88.9% of the operators speculated that Thailand was prone to be struck by natural disasters with moderately to highly devastating impact on business.

The potential disaster in Regional Sections: 82.6% of the operators speculated that the regional sections were prone to be struck by natural disasters with moderately to highly devastating impact on business.

The potential disaster in Province: 78.8% of the operators speculated that the provinces was prone to be struck by natural disasters with moderately to highly devastating impact on business.

Table 8 Potential Natural Disaster and Its Devastating Impact on Business Percentage (%)


Are the following regions prone to be struck by the natural disaster and what is the devastating impact on

your business ?

Probability of Occurrence

Devastating impacts on your business

No YesNo adversely

impactVery little

Little Moderate High Veryhigh

Thailand Regional Section Province

Percentage (%)


20

3.2 Anxiety about Business Being Struck by Potential Natural Disaster When asked about the level of anxiety at the chance of their businesses’ being struck by natural disaster, 39.7% of the respondents’ anxiety were moderate, while 20.7 % no anxiety at all, and 14.6% high.

Chart 6 Levels of Anxiety about Business Being Struck by Potential Natural Disaster


Section 4: Perception and Natural Disaster Assessment

4.1 The Tracing of Natural Disaster Information/News and Tracing Channels

More than half of the respondents (54.5%) moderately traced information/news about the natural disasters, while 26.1% highly did, 10.3% rarely and only 3.7% not at all (Chart 7)

Chart 7 The Tracing of Information/News about Natural Disaster


No anxiety at all. 20.7%

Very little 5.6%

Little 19.0%

Moderate 39.7%

High 14.6%

Very High 0.5%

No 3.7%

Very little 4.0%

Little 10.3%

Moderate 54.5%

High 26.1%

Very High 1.4%


21

When asking about the tracing channels, most of the operators (40.0%) received the information via television, 21.8% from the internet, 16.4% Newspaper, 12.7% radio, 5.3% Government officials, 2.1% Community news broadcasting unit and 1.7% via other channels e.g. sms, journal. (Chart 8)

Chart 8 Information Tracing Channels


4.2 Types of Potential Disaster and Levels of Concern

In response to the question about the types of natural disaster that the locations of the business risk, most of the operators’ business (45.2%) risked inland flooding, earthquake 17.9%, drought 11.4% and tropical cyclone 11.3% consecutively. (Table 9)

When further inquiring only those operators whose business were vulnerable to the natural disaster about types of potential disaster and levels of concern, the response were:

51.1% of the business were jeopardizing to inland flooding and 50.5% of the entrepreneurs were no worried at all, while 21.2% moderate concerned.

25.9% of the business were jeopardizing to earthquake and 75.1% of the entrepreneurs were no worried at all, while 11.3% concerned at low level.

14.7% of the business were jeopardizing to drought and 85.9% of the entrepreneurs were no worried at all, while 6.8% moderate concerned.

15.2% of the business were jeopardizing to tropical cyclone and 82.6% were no worried at all, while 7.7% moderate concerned.

1.7

2.1

5.3

12.7

16.4

21.8

40.0

Other e.g. Sms, journal

Community news broadcasting unit

Government officials

Radio

Newspaper

Internet

Television

(%)


22

Table 9 Types of Potential Disaster and Levels of Anxiety Percentage (%)

Area’s Jeopardy/1

Disaster Tendency to occur/2

Degree o f Anxiety

No Yes No anxiety at all

Little Moderate High

Earthquake 82.1 17.9 25.9 75.1 11.3 10.3 3.3 Inland Flooding 54.8 45.2 51.1 50.5 15.6 21.2 12.7 Coastal Flooding 96.0 4.0 5.1 92.2 5.4 1.9 0.5 Landslides 97.4 2.6 3.8 91.3 6.3 2.3 0.0 Tropical Cyclone 88.7 11.3 15.2 82.6 7.3 7.7 2.3 Drought 88.6 11.4 14.7 85.9 5.2 6.8 2.1 Tsunami 91.3 8.7 10.3 86.3 7.1 4.2 2.4 Flash flooding 97.4 2.6 3.8 93.2 3.8 2.1 0.9 Storms 97.2 2.8 3.8 92.9 4.7 1.9 0.5 Forest Fire 96.7 3.3 4.4 92.0 4.5 2.6 0.9 Source: from the Survey Notes: /1 area/location which is vulnerable to or potential to be struck by natural disaster and brought about negative

effect/damage/loss of inhabitants’ lives, ways of livings, and properties. /2 the respondents’ points of views concerning area/location, surroundings, and other factors which lead to/influence on

the disruption of natural disasters

Section 5: Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business

5.1 Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business 36.2% of the respondents assessed the level of their preparedness to cope with a natural disaster as moderate, while 32.4% not ready at all, only 10.6% high to very high and 10.8% low to very low. (Chart 9)

Chart 9 Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness of the Business


Not ready at all 32.4%

Very low 1.6%

Low 9.2%Moderate 36.2%

High 18.5%

Very High 2.1%


23

5.2 Natural Disaster Management Plan On the enquiry whether the business had plan for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) it was found that 73.2% of business had no plan for DRM. The reasons were that 42.3% found no necessity, 25.2% Lack/inadequacy of knowledgeable personnel/experts, 17.5% Lack of understanding, 8.4% Lack of tools, and 6.6% Lack of resources. There were only 26.8% of the respondents had DRM plan. Upon asking those who had DRM plans about the revision period of the plan and activities specified in the plan, it was found that some were annually revised, some revised after the year of 2011 and some had never been revised. The details of the activities specified in the DRM plan were: NDM rehearsal and training plan, preparation for devices, electricity and running water management, first aid preparedness and searching for auxiliary place, a notice that If there is flood, move things up high /if earthquake, be in an open air and installation of Warning system, Insurance purchasing.

Chart 10 Natural Disaster Management Plan


2

No Yes73.2% 26.8%

ReasonPercentage

(%)Found no necessity Lack inadequacy of knowledgeablepersonnel/experts Lack of understanding

Lack of tools Lack of resources

NDM plan’s Revision

Every year

After year 2011

Never

What is specified in the plan?

An essential plan for NDM rehearsal and training

Preparation for devices, electricity and running water management, first aid and searching for auxiliary place

If there is flood, move things up high if earthquake, be in an open air

Warning system to be installed, Insurance purchasing


24

5.3 The Practicality of DRM Plan When asking those who had DRM plan about the practicality of their DRM plans, 90.7% of the respondent’s could implement as planned, only 9.3% were unable to implement the plan due to insufficiency of budget, lack of knowledgeable personnel and the suddenness of the phenomenon.

Chart 11 The Practicality of DRM Plan


5.4 Elements of Natural Disaster Preparedness

The results presented in this part were the 4 elements of Natural disaster Preparedness: Preparedness Assessment, Natural Disaster Prevention Planning, Staff Training and Asset Prevention and Risk Insurance. The presentation of the results were in percentage and the average preparedness level of the full 6 point score. The meaning of the range of the average scores were as follows: 5.155 – 6.000 meaned the most preparation, 4.324 – 5.154 high preparation, 3.493 – 4.323 moderate preparation, 2.662 – 3.492 little preparation, 1.831 – 2.661 very little preparation and 1.000 – 1.830 no preparation at all.

In case that your business has already had DRM plan, could you operate as planned?

No9.3%Yes

90.7%

Reason

Insufficiency of budget

Lack of knowledgeable personnel

The suddenness of the phenomenon


25

1) Preparedness Assessment On the issue of Preparedness Assessment 4 aspects were investigated:

1. Tracing news/information about the local natural disaster 2. Enquiry for the local prevention/mitigation plan

3. Identification of the area’s jeopardy to the disaster 4. Installation of devices to lessen the devastating impact/ minimize loss

It was found that:

Tracing news/information about the local natural disaster: the level of preparedness for aspect of tracing the natural disaster information/news, of 43.1% operators was moderate, 23.4% was little, 19.9% high and 13.6% no preparation at all. The average score of preparedness was 3.498.

Enquiry for the local prevention/mitigation plan: the level of preparedness for this aspect of 33.0% operators was little, 31.9% moderate, 23.0% no preparation at all and 12.2%. The average score of preparedness was 3.002

Identification of the area’s jeopardy to the disaster: the level of preparedness for the aspect of 31.9% operators was little, 30.4% no preparation at all, 27.2% moderate and 0.5%. The average score of preparedness was 2.752.

Installation of devices to lessen the devastating impact/ minimize loss: it was found that 47.3% of operators were not at all be prepared for the aspect, 22.5% moderate, 19.7% little and 10.5%high. The average score of preparedness was 2.424. The study revealed that preparedness of the operators for the aspect of Preparedness Assessment was very low with the average score of 2.919. Comparing with other aspects, the level of preparedness for tracing news/information about the local natural disaster was higher than the others. The least preparedness level was the Installation of devices to lessen the devastating impact/ minimize loss (Table 10)


26

Table 10 Preparedness Assessment Preparedness Assessment Not at all

(%) Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

Tracing news/information about the local natural disaster

13.6 23.4 43.1 19.9 3.498

Enquiry for the local prevention/mitigation plan 23.0 33.0 31.9 12.2 3.002 Identification of the area’s jeopardy to the disaster

30.4 31.9 27.2 10.5 2.752

Installation of devices to lessen the devastating impact/ minimize loss

47.3 19.7 22.5 10.5 2.424

2.919 Source: from Calculation

2) Natural Disaster Prevention Planning In the study 12 manoeuvres were investigated in Natural Disaster Prevention Planning. They were:

1. Lists of actual contact information(names, telephone numbers) of local agency responsible for disaster management

2. Procedures to tackle problems of loss of public utility (e.g. water or electricity

3. Establishment of internal communications in case of the failures of electricity power/communication systems

4. Transport management system 5. The Backup of significant/essential information 6. Emergency plans concerning suppliers/customers 7. How to get assistance from outsiders during the disaster 8. Business sectors cooperation 9. Local government agency cooperation on disaster prevention 10. Public and private Organization cooperation to minimize devastating

impact/loss

11. Dissemination of news/information about both global and local natural disasters to employees

12. There are explicitly and clearly specification of roles and responsibilities during the disaster


27

The studies were as follows: Manouvre for lists of actual contact information (names,

telephone numbers) of local agency responsible for disaster management: 45.0% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was high, 27.5% moderate, 20.7% no ready at all. The average score of preparedness was 4.026.

Manouvre for procedures to tackle problems of loss of public utility (e.g. water or electricity): 41.7% of the operators’ state of preparedness for this plan was high, 29.4% moderate, 21.2% little, and 7.7% null. The average score of preparedness was 3.972.

Manouvre for establishment of internal communications in case of the failures of electricity power/communication systems: 39.5% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was high, 32.5% was moderate, 19.4% little and 8.6% null. The average score of preparedness was 3.951.

Manouvre for transport management system: 32.8% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 26.2% moderate, 22.5% no plans at all, และระดับมาก 18.5%. The average score of preparedness was 3.098.

Manouvre for Backup of significant/essential information: 30.0% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 26.5% high, 24.8% no plan at all and 18.7%moderate. The average score of preparedness was 3.173

Manouvre for emergency plans concerning suppliers/customers: 29.6% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 24.7% no plan at all, 24.0% moderate and 21.6% high. The average score of preparedness was 3.113.

Manouvre for ways to get assistance from outsiders during the disaster: 33.5% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 30.2% moderate, 19.7% no plan at all, and 16.6% high. The average score of preparedness was 3.166.

Manouvre for business sectors cooperation: 30.6% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 26.6% moderate, 25.6% no plan at all, and 17.2% high. The average score of preparedness was 3.016.

Manouvre for local government agency cooperation on disaster prevention: 31.6% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 27.9% moderate, 22.0% no plan at all, and 18.5% high. The average score of preparedness was 3.133.


28

Manouvre for public and private organization cooperation to minimize devastating impact/loss: 37.9% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 26.4% moderate, 23.6% no plan at all and 12.1% high. The average score of preparedness was 2.923.

Manouvre for dissemination of news/information about both global and local natural disasters to employees: 42.0% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was little, 26.8% no plan at all, 23.9% moderate and 7.3% high. The average score of preparedness was 2.718.

Manouvre for explicit and clear specification of roles and responsibilities during the disaster: 37.2% of the operators’ state of preparedness for the plan was null, 35.1% little, 20.4% moderate and only 7.3% high. The average score of preparedness was 2.483.

It could be concluded that the overall state of preparedness for Natural Disaster Prevention Planning of Thai entrepreneurs was low with an average readiness score of 3.231. However, there were 3 manouvres that were higher prepared than other plans. They were plans for lists of actual contact information (names, telephone numbers) of local agency responsible for disaster management (4.026), plans for procedures to tackle problems of loss of public utility (e.g. water or electricity) (3.972) and plans for establishment of internal communications in case of the failures of electricity power/communication systems (3.951). The least preparedness was the plan for explicit and clear specification of roles and responsibilities during the disaster. (Table 11)


29

Table 11 Natural Disaster Prevention Planning Natural Disaster Prevention Planning Not at all

(%) Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

Lists of actual contact information(names, telephone numbers) of local agency responsible for disaster management

6.8 20.7 27.5 45.0 4.026

Procedures to tackle problems of loss of public utility (e.g. water or electricity)

7.7 21.2 29.4 41.7 3.972

Establishment of internal communications in case of the failures of electricity power/ communication systems

8.6 19.4 32.5 39.5 3.951

Transport management system 22.5 32.8 26.2 18.5 3.098 The Backup of significant/essential information 24.8 30.0 18.7 26.5 3.173 Emergency plans concerning suppliers/customers

24.7 29.6 24.0 21.6 3.113

Ways to get assistance from outsiders during the disaster

19.7 33.5 30.2 16.6 3.166

Business sectors cooperation 25.6 30.6 26.6 17.2 3.016 Local government agency cooperation on disaster prevention

22.0 31.6 27.9 18.5 3.133

Public and private Organization cooperation to minimize devastating impact/loss

23.6 37.9 26.4 12.1 2.923

Dissemination of news/information about both global and local natural disasters to employees

26.8 42.0 23.9 7.3 2.718

Explicit and clear specification of roles and responsibilities during the disaster.

37.2 35.1 20.4 7.3 2.483



30

3) Staff Training The investigation on the preparedness for Staff Training was as follows:

1. Regular personnel training on what to do during the disaster outbreak 2. Activities to reinforce staff knowledge on how to prevent/minimize loss 3. Writing handbook on what to do when the disaster strikes. 4. Setting regular rehearsal for Natural Disaster Preparedness.

43.9% of the operators told that there were no regular

personnel training on what to do during the disaster outbreak, while 24.3% said that their staffs were sometimes trained, 22.2% rarely, and only 9.6% frequently. The average score of preparedness was 2.488.

43.8% of the operators told that there were no activities to reinforce staff knowledge on how to prevent/minimize loss, 24.0% said they organized few activities and 21.3% several and 9.1% many. The average score of preparedness was 2.471.

44.9% of the operators told that there were no handbook on what to do when the disaster strikes. 25.0% had handbook little written, 21.3% moderately written and 8.9% nearly wholly written. The average score of preparedness was 2.439.

52.4% of the operators told that there were no schedule of regular rehearsal for Natural Disaster Preparedness, 21.2% set less regular rehearsal, 20.0% set more regular rehearsal and 6.3% routinely rehearse. The average score of preparedness was 2.219. The study showed that Thai SME preparedness for Staff Training was very critical. The average score in every acticities was 2.402 less than 2.500. Especially the average score of the setting of regular rehearsal for Natural Disaster Preparedness was the least. (Table 12)


31

Table 12 Staff Training Staff Training Not at all

(%) Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

Personnel are regularly trained what to do during the disaster outbreak

43.9 22.2 24.3 9.6 2.488

Activities to reinforce staff knowledge on how to prevent/minimize loss are brought about.

43.8 24.0 23.1 9.1 2.471

Handbook on what to do when the disaster strikes are written.

44.9 25.0 21.3 8.9 2.439

Regular Rehearsal for Natural Disaster Preparedness are set.

52.4 21.2 20.0 6.3 2.219


4) Asset Prevention and Risk Insurance

The study on asset prevention and risk insurance investigated in 3 aspects as below.

1. An analysis on financial aid/fund when disaster strikes. 2. Natural Disaster Insurance. 3. Management/rehabilitation plans after the disaster

It was found that: 35.0% of the operators never did an analysis on financial

aid/fund for disaster management. 27.6% did few analysis, 23.4% did some analysis and 14.0% did numerous analysis. The average score of preparedness was 2.722

As for the preparedness for natural disaster insurance it was found that the ratio of the moderate preparation and null preparedness was the same, that is, 25.9%, while 25.2% were high and 23.1%were low. The average score of preparedness was 2.850.

The natural disaster preparedness for Asset prevention and Risk Insurance was low with the average score of 2.918. The level of readiness that was higher than other aspects was Natural Disaster Insurance. (Table 13)


32

Table 13 Asset prevention and Risk Insurance Asset prevention and Risk Insurance Not at all

(%) Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

An analysis on financial aid/fund when disaster strikes.

35.0 27.6 23.4 14.0 2.722

Natural Disaster Insurance. 25.9 23.1 25.9 25.2 3.182 Management/rehabilitation plans after the disaster

31.1 28.5 24.5 15.9 2.850


From the study it could be concluded that of all the 4 aspects of Natural Disaster Preparedness Thai entrepreneurs’s readiness was low to very low and among these aspects the highest level of preparedness was Natural Disaster Prevention with an average score of 3.231. (Chart 12)

Chatr 12 Levels of Preparedness of Thai Entrepreneurs


2.919

3.231

2.404

2.918 0123456

Preparedness Assessment

Natural Disaster Prevention Planning

Staff Training

Asset prevention and Risk Insurance


33

5.5 Natural Disaster Management Cooperation with Local Government The study showed that 76.5% of entrepreneurs had no cooperation with the local government; only 23.5% cooperated with the local government. The cooperations were help building screen for water and information dissemination from municipality to the inhabitants.

Chart 13 Natural Disaster Management Cooperation with Local Government


5.6 Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness of Thai Citizen

Upon asking the respondents’ opinion on Level of Natural Disaster Preparedness of Thai Citizen, 47.1% of the operators believed that the state of preparedness of Thai people was moderate, while 18.6% indicated the low preparedness of Thai people and 14.5% very low. Only 5.4% stated that Thai people were not at all prepared for the disaster. (Chart 13) Focused on the government’s acknowledgement of the importance together with the state of preparedness for natural disaster management, 44.5% of the operators assessed the degree of the government’s readiness and the acknowledgement as moderate; 18.6% assessed as low, while 16.8% high and only 6.8% believed that the government did not acklowledge the importance of natural disaster management and the government was not at all being prepared for natural disaster. (Chart 14)

Do you cooperate with local government on Natural Disaster Management?

Yes23.5%

Never76.5%

Details about your cooperation

Help building screen for water

Disseminate information from municipality to the inhabitants


34

Chart 14 The Entrepreneurs’ Opinion on Levels of Natural Disaster Preparedness


Section 6: Natural Disaster Vulnerability Assessment

6.1 Natural Disaster Vulnerability Assessment Regarding the potentiality of the business in coping with the disasters, it

was found that their potentiality was low. Followings were details. On Natural Disaster Risk Insurance, it was found that the

potentiality of the business was low with an average score of 3.299. Concerning warning system when the disaster strikes, it was

found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 3.033. On targeting place/land to evacuate people to, it was found that

the business potentiality was low with an average score of 3.026. Concerning disaster watch-dog networking, it was found that the

business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.882. Regarding availibilty of equipment, devices, vehicles in case of

evacuation, it was found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.852. Concerning effective risk prevention methods being taught to

staffs, it was found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.631. Concerning staff’s competency to handle the calamity timely and

efficiently, it was found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.565.

In your opinion how well has Thai people prepared for the natural

disaster.

Percentage(%)

No preparation plan at all

Very little Little

Moderate high

Very high

What is your opinion about the government’s natural disaster

accentuation and preparedness?

2

Percentage (%)

No preparation plan at all

Very little

Little

Moderate

high

Very high


35

Regarding the ready-to-implement operation mechanism to minimize loss, it was found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.549.

On budget allocation for the disaster, it was found that the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.536.

Regarding the establishment of Natural Disaster Knowledge Management in the business, it was found that the business potentiality was very low with an average score of 2.522

Concerning DRM knowledgeable/skilful personnel resource, it was found that the business potentiality was very low with an average score of 2.511

Table 14 The business potentiality in coping with naturaral disasters Degrees of Potentiality

Not at all (%)

Little (%)

Moderate (%)

High (%)

Point average

Natural Disaster Risk Insurance 23.8 23.3 25.9 27.1 3.299 Warning system when the disaster strikes. 34.6 20.7 18.6 26.1 3.033 Target place/land to evacuate people to 33.9 23.5 15.1 27.5 3.026 Disaster watch-dog networking 39.3 17.9 19.5 23.3 2.882 Equipment, devices, vehicles being made ready in case of evacuation

33.8 27.7 18.5 20.0 2.852

Effective risk prevention methods being taught to staff 30.8 38.4 23.1 7.8 2.631 Staff’s competency to handle the calamity timely and efficiently.

32.2 41.4 17.8 8.6 2.565

Operation Mechanism to minimize loss already being created

33.8 37.6 22.1 6.6 2.549

Budget allocated for the disaster 34.9 37.0 21.8 6.3 2.536 Natural Disaster Knowledge Management being established in your business.

31.9 41.1 21.7 5.2 2.522

DRM knowledgeable/skilful personnel 35.4 39.1 17.1 8.4 2.511 2.764


On account of the overall potentiality of business in coping with natural disasters, the business potentiality was low with an average score of 2.764. Among these potentials, the operators’ potentiality for Natural Disaster Risk Insurance was higher than others.


36

6.2 Natural Disaster Vulnerability Assessment On enquiring the respondents about the staffs’ understanding of warning

signals, 84.5% of the operators answered their staffs could understand the warning signals; only 15.5% responded that their staffs would not understand the signals.

When futher asking whether their staffs know how to recat to the signals, 80.8% of the operators notified that they know how to react to the signals; only 19.2% told that their staffs would not know how to react.

Concerning the staffs’ knowledge of procedures stated in the Disaster Risk Management Plan, 42.5% of the operators told that their staffs knew the procedures at the degree of moderate; 24.2% at the degree of high and 23.9% low. Only 9.4% answered that their staffs would not understand the plan and procedures.

Chart 15 The Understanding of Warning Signals/Procedures stated in the Business’

Disaster Risk Management Plan


In case of warning system being at work, do your staffs understand the

meaning of the sound/signal?

Percentage (%)

No Yes

Do your staffs know how to react to sound/signal?

Percentage (%)

No Yes

No 9.4%Very little 7.5%

Little 16.4%

Moderate 42.5%

High 18.1%

Very High 6.1%

Staffs know the steps procedures stated in the Business’ Disaster Risk Management Plan


37

Section 7: Natural Disaster Management (DRM) Training Need Assessment

7.1 The Business’ Knowledge Background on Natural Disaster Management The study showed that most of the operators (73.1%) never knew or heard

about Disaster Risk Management (DRM); only 26.9% had known/heard before. (Chart 16)

Chart 16 The Business’ Knowledge Background on Natural Disaster Management


7.2 The Necessity of Natural Disaster Management Training for the Business

Focused on the level of necessity for the business to train their staffs on Natural Disaster Risk Management (DRM) it was found that 42.8% of the operators stated they moderately needed for the training; 24.9% highly to very high; 11.9% little and 15.4% found no necessity. (Chart 17)

Chart 17 The Necessity of Natural Disaster Management Training for the Business


Never73.1%

Yes26.9%

No 15.4%

Very little 5.0%

Little 11.9%

Moderate 42.8%

High 23.0%

Very high 1.9%


38

7.3 The Business Backgound of DRM Training/Seminar Attendence On asking whether the operators/staffs had ever attended DRM Training/Seminar, it was found that 86.9% of the operators had never attended any DRM training; only 13.1% had. The training organizers were Municipality, the District Administration Organization, Department of Disaster, Prevention and Mitigation, Department of Irrigation, Chieng Rai Horticultural Research Center, and Department of Tourism. (Chart 18)

Chart 18 The Business’ Backgound of DRM Training/Seminar Attendence


7.3 The DRM Training/Seminar Requirement and DRM Content

71.7% of the operators stated that they wanted to be trained on Disaster Risk Management. The topics that they required to be trained most were Natural Disaster Preparedness Planning (24.9%); Natural Disaster Mitigation Planning (16.6%); Natural Disaster Management (14.6%) and Natural Disaster Risk/Loss Assessment (13.3%) consecutively. (Chart 19)

Have you ever attended the DRM training/seminar?

Yes

Never

Organizers

Municipality

The District Administration Organization

Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation

Department of Irrigation

Horticultural Research Center, Chieng Rai

Department of Tourism


39

Chart 19 DRM Training/Seminar Requirement and DRM Content


When classifying DRM training/seminar requirements according to types,

sizes and locations/provinces, it was found that:

Types of business: nearly all types of business wanted DRM training/seminar. More than 60% of operators in Hotels and Restaurants wanted more training/seminar than others, on the contrary, those in Machinery and Electronic Appliances and Transportation and Communication stated no requirements for the training/seminar on the proportion of 53.3% and 50.5% consecutively. (Table 15)

Size of business: From both types of business—small and medium—more than 60% of the operators (67%-86%) wanted to be trained on DRM. Operators in medium business enterprise required more training than those in the small enterprise. (Table 15)

Office Location: The operators in Phitsanulok required DRM training more than those in others provinces, while those in Ubon Ratchathani required minimum training. (Table 15)

39

Topics that you want learn Percentage (%)

Law and policies concerning DRM

Process and Devices concerning DRM Integrating DRM in Business Plan

Natural Disaster Risk/Loss Assessment

Natural Disaster Management Natural Disaster Preparedness Plan

Natural Disaster Mitigation Plan

Yes

No

Do you want you/your staff to attend DRM seminar/training?


40

Table 15 DRM Training Requirement and DRM Content classified according to Types, Size of Business and Office Location

Types of Business No (%) Yes (%) Types of Business Food and Beverages 25.0 75.0 Rubber and Plastic Products 20.0 80.0 Television and Communication 20.0 80.0 Metal Products 33.3 66.7 Machinery and Electronic Appliances 53.3 46.7 Transportation and Communication 50.0 50.0 Hotels and Restaurants 17.1 82.9 Size of Business Small 33.0 67.0 Medium 14.0 86.0 Office Location Ubon Ratchathani 41.9 58.1 Chiang Rai 22.8 77.2 Phitsanulok 19.6 80.4 Songkhla 22.0 78.0 Phuket 26.6 73.4 Phra Nakhon Sri Ayuthaya 34.5 65.5 Source: from the Survey

7.4 DRM Training Techniques and Duration of Training/Seminar

The study showed that 71.6% of operators identified lecture and workshop/simulations as appropriate techniques with the proportion of 44.4% lecture and 55.6% workshop/simulations. The second approppriate techniques identified by 19.3% of operators were lecture, workshop/simulations and study tour with the proportion of 33.0%, 40.0% and 27.0% consecutively. (Table 16)


41

Table 16 DRM Training/Seminar Techniques % Ot

respondents Lecture Workshop

/Simulations Study Tour

Lecture, workshop/simulations and study tour 19.3 33.0 40.0 27.0 Lecture and workshop/simulations 71.6 44.4 55.6 - Lecture 2.8 100.0 Workshop/simulations and study tour 1.2 - 62.5 37.5 Workshop/simulations 4.6 - 100.0 - Study tour 0.3 - - 100.0 Lecture and study tour 0.3 50.0 - 50.0 Source: from the Survey

Regarding the reasonable duration of DRM training/seminar, 85.3% of

operators notified that the most reasonable training period was 1-2 day; the second reasonable was 3-5 days. (Chart 20)

Chart 20 Duration of DRM Training/Seminar


1-2 days 85.3%

3-5 days 12.8%

More than 5 days 1.9%


42

7.5 Willingness to Attend DRM Training/Seminar The answers for the enquiry of the willingness to attend DRM

training/seminar in case of a training/seminar being organized were 77.1% of the operators willing to attend out of which 20.7% willing to pay for the training/seminar; while 56.4% of the operators willing to attend but without pay. Among these respondents 23.0% were not willing to attend the training/seminar. (Table 17)

Table 17 Willingness to Attend DRM Training/Seminar

Percentage (%) Unwilling to attend 23.0 Willing to attend without financial support 56.4 Willing to attend with financial support 20.7 Source: from the Survey

7.6 Communication Channels to get DRM information

Concerning the communication channels to get DRM information, the best channels specified by 25.9% of operators was internet/website, the second best by 21.2% was television, the third newsletters by 18.3% and the fourth was brochures specified by 13.4% of the operators. (Chart 21)

Chart 21 Communication Channels to Get DRM information


Meeting 6.4%

Internet/Website 25.9%

Brochures 13.4%

Workshop/training sessions 5.8%

Newsletters 18.3%

TV 21.2%

Posters/Leaflets 9.1%


43

7.7 Levels of Confidence to Cope With the Natural Disaster For the enquiry of in what extent of DRM knowledge would assist the

operators to efficiently coping with the natural disaster and administrating the business during a disaster, most of the operators (56.1%) had moderately confidence; while 35.2% had high confidence that DRM knowledge would help them manage the situation; only 8.7% had little confidence. (Chart 22)

Chart 22 Levels of Confidence to Cope With the Natural Disaster


Very little 1.4%

Little 7.3%

Moderate 56.1%

High 34.3%

Very High 0.9%

an assessment of the disaster preparedness of thailand ... · 4.2 elements of natural disaster...

Documents