By Luis Carvalho, Municipal Coordinator of Civil Protection and Commander of the Amadora Municipal Police
The responsibility for reducing disaster risk is a mission that concerns everyone and, out of ethics and principles of humanism and solidarity, should be part of daily life, from how we educate the youngest to how we plan our cities. To ensure the resilience of a community, it is essential to have an approach based on engagement, unity, information sharing and the implementation of the various levels of knowledge, which must be guaranteed by the State, by all public-private entities and by the citizen. It is true that the level of responsibility is differentiated, with the State (central and local administration) taking the lead role to promote intersectoral alignment to ensure that communities are structured for the unpredictable and for the inevitable, with the support of all the entities that comprise society.
Despite global awareness, the complexity with which phenomena have affected populations, particularly in this century, should lead us to a discussion, at the different levels (international, national and local) about what is the real capacity for preparation, response and recovery by the authorities and the communities. We practically have three certainties: first, that we are more exposed to risks that we know (and those we do not yet know!); second, that entities and authorities are, in general, better prepared to deal with risk and catastrophe. It is indisputable, for example, that there exists technical, scientific and operational know-how for risk and disaster management in Portugal, much greater than at the end of the last century. It is equally indisputable that there exists a notable effort at the local level to “muscle” its capacity for anticipation, intervention and restoration of normality, taking into account the hazards and vulnerabilities that exist; the third is that in the 2000s the scenarios foreseen by the United Nations pointed to a substantial increase in the impact of disasters on communities, alongside the rise in average air and ocean temperatures, up to 2030, which is indeed happening.
Now, what should concern us at this moment is that uncertainties outpace certainties. The paradigm of disasters across diverse political, demographic, economic and social contexts, and with varying levels of investment, reveals numerous fragilities in common in risk communication, emergency relief and support to populations. Facts: in Japan, despite an exemplary risk culture, the 2011 tsunami killed nearly 19,000 people and caused damages of 300 billion euros. The seabed rose by more than 50 meters, the largest rise observed in a single earthquake. In Pedrógão Grande, in 2017, the rural wildfires where 66 people died were based on the neglect of fuel-management strips and protection for population clusters, and a meteorological severity characterized by hot, dry weather. More recently (October 2024), in Valencia, 445.4 liters per square meter fell in 24 hours. It rained so much in one day as would normally rain in a year in the Valencia region—the annual average precipitation in the Valencian Community is about 500 mm. Days before the disaster, the State Meteorological Agency (AEMET) warned authorities and the population that there was a 70% probability of torrential rainfall. At 7:30 in the morning on the day of the disaster, it issued a red alert for severe weather. The regional authorities only sent text messages to the population to stay at home a little after 8:00 p.m. 224 people died.
In these three examples, the urgency to reduce the impact of the unpredictable and the inevitable is evident, and to strengthen the population’s capacity to resist and adapt to disaster. Assuming that there are not enough human resources and logistics, from authorities and competent entities, to guarantee a sustained response to a disaster that disrupts the daily life of cities, must be seen as an opportunity and not as a threat. We should not perpetuate the idea that faced with 8,600 occurrences in 48 hours, as happened with the Martinho Depression (March 2025), we achieve the desired efficiency in safeguarding all people, animals and goods.
Portugal has undoubtedly a relevant level of solidarity in disaster response and recovery. There are several examples of mobilization of the population to support affected communities. But on the other hand, we lack more dialogue and the capacity to consolidate the solutions that are imposed so that the culture of prevention and planning takes root in daily life. The power outage that affected the Iberian Peninsula, on April 28, 2025, demonstrates this: numerous weaknesses of local and national structures in guaranteeing the safety, relief and health of populations, as well as, from the individual point of view, the noticeable inability to guarantee the sustenance of our basic needs in a disruptive situation.
The unpredictable and the inevitable must be assumed as a real scenario when it comes to disaster. And to face this scenario we must quickly bet on two principles: the principle of clear and effective communication to the population about existing and potential risks, so that it is perceivable by all that the responsibility for preparation, response and recovery from a disaster must be shared; and the principle of empowering the population for exceptional scenarios, through the dimensions of education and associativism, where there are conditions and time for dialogue, reflection and implementation of programs and/or projects in the areas of basic life support and family emergency planning.
An informed and empowered population will guarantee a higher level of resilience, from both an individual and a collective perspective. And that is what we must all strive to achieve!
