In the aftermath of the recent natural disasters that hit Sri Lanka, various forms of criticism have emerged against the Government and key weather and disaster related agencies such as the Met Department and the Disaster Management Centre. Opposition parties and certain social activists argue that these institutions have failed to issue adequate warnings and did not respond swiftly enough to mitigate the destruction caused by cyclone Ditwah. Some have gone so far as to call for legal action, insisting that the Government and the authorities must accept responsibility for the loss of lives and property.

These criticisms stem from the widely shared notion the relevant authorities were either slow to act or ineffective in communicating the seriousness of the situation. Allegations include delayed responses, ineffective communication and insufficient preventive action. In a country that experiences floods and landslides during adverse weather periods, these allegations deserve attention in order to strengthen the systems that exist to protect people.

According to the available information, the authorities had issued warnings, particularly regarding the heavy rainfall that eventually triggered other disasters, through their conventional channels. However, the key issue is not just whether the warnings were issued, but whether they truly reached the public and at-risk groups, whether they effectively conveyed the gravity of the situation and whether adequate response actions were taken on the ground.

These questions point to a deeper problem, i.e. many people don’t take weather forecasts or warnings seriously. This is especially true in disaster-prone regions where communities experience frequent alerts about adverse weather events that sometimes don’t occur or lead to actual dangerous situations. When warnings don’t always lead to visible threats, people naturally develop a sense of complacency. Over time, this affects how seriously people take alerts. At the same time, some people are not familiar with certain terminology used in weather advisories, while a large portion of the population may not know how to interpret these messages or what immediate steps they should take. As a result, warnings that should trigger quick and decisive action are sometimes met with confusion or indifference.

This is where awareness and disaster preparedness are crucial. Public education cannot be treated as an optional step. Instead, it must be embedded into the country’s risk-reduction strategy. People need practical knowledge as to how to respond quickly, where to keep important documents and valuables, how to identify or use safe evacuation routes, what early signs of landslides or floods look like, and which authorities to contact during emergencies. For those living in high-risk areas, both material and mental preparedness are essential. Communication methods must also evolve. Not everyone watches the news or checks websites. Many people, especially younger generations, primarily consume information through the social media. Others rely on short message service text alerts or community networks. It is time for the authorities to develop more impactful, diversified channels of communication including visual alerts, voice messages in multiple languages, community loudspeaker systems and partnerships with mobile networks. Early warnings should be simple and accessible.

In addition, learning from past disasters must become part of institutional culture. Data, case studies and post-disaster reviews should guide reforms, ensuring that the previous mistakes are not repeated. Provincial and Local-level actors, including Grama Niladharis, local councils and community groups must be fully integrated into the national disaster preparedness framework as they interact with the people close than high level public officials. The Government should maintain clear registries of vulnerable households, evacuation centres, community volunteers and emergency contacts to support these efforts.

At the end of the day, responsibility is a shared one. The authorities must strengthen their systems, communication and response mechanisms, while the public must take warnings seriously and invest in their own preparedness. Disasters cannot always be prevented, but, the devastation that they cause can be significantly reduced with early action. We must remember that global environmental changes have intensified extreme weather patterns worldwide, and Sri Lanka is no exception. As an island with limited land, our vulnerability is high and environmental disasters are becoming more frequent and severe. This is why it is crucial that we adopt a proactive approach rather than reacting after tragedy strikes.