Scientific Contributions to Effective Early Warning in an Environmental Context

  • Alexander L. Alusa


Whenever there is an environmental disaster, efforts are made in every direction, largely to manage a crisis situation. Often there is no time to attribute blame or indeed to determine where the system went wrong. But ultimately, when the crisis is over, it helps to take stock of what happened, what should have happened and why it did not happen or why it was not effective if it did happen. Then finger pointing starts. The policy makers, scientists and public begin to blame each other, but in the end, the public is left bewildered and compromised.

This paper seeks to highlight the role of science in Early Warning Systems for environmental disasters. It will flag the problems in, and indeed barriers to, communications between scientists, policy makers and the public. The paper starts off on the premise that science needs to be the basis of most policy responses to environmental disasters. It then attempts to identify communication barriers between the policy maker and the scientist; and the public and the policy maker. It is suggested that impact and vulnerability assessments could constitute a possible avenue to bridging the gap between the scientist and the policy maker; the policy maker and the general public and, the scientist and the public. The capacity to respond to a given environmental disaster, is also an essential ingredient for effective use of Early Warning Systems. It is argued that in many cases the finger pointing is the result of a system that lacks the resources to respond to a disaster and would wish to ascribe inability to be proactive to limited or unavailable information from the specialist. The need for political will, proper governance and accountability are also identified as barriers to effectiveness of Early Warning Systems.

Examples, largely from weather/climate related disasters are cited to support some of these hypotheses.


Policy Maker Natural Disaster Early Warning Vulnerability Assessment Early Warning System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Parry ML, Carter TR (1988) The Assessment of Effects of Climate Variations on Agriculture: A Summary of Results from Studies in Semi-Arid Regions. In: Parry ML Carter TR, Konijn NJ (eds) The Impact of Climate Variations on Agriculture. Vol. 2, Assessments in Semi-arid Regions, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Robinson J (1994) The How, Where, When and Why of ENSO-Fire Relationship: Usable Science II. Report of the Workshop on the Potential Use and Misuse of El Niño Information in North America. ESIG, National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Tapscott C (1993) Is a better Forecast the Answer to Better Food Security? To Better Early Warning? To Better Famine Prevention? Proceedings of the ENSO/ Famine Early Warning Systems Workshop. Budapest, Hungary, 23–28 October 1993Google Scholar
  4. Wallace JM, Rasmusson EM, Mitchell TP, Kousky VE, Sarachik ES, von Storch H (1998) On the Structure and Evolution of ENSO-related Climate Variability in the tropical Pacific: Lessons from TOGA. J Geophs Research vol. 103, no. C7. American Geophysical Union, Washington D.C., USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Walker P (1989) Famine Early Warning Systems. Earthscan, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. Watson RT, Zinyowera MC, Moss RH (eds) (1998) The Regional Impacts of Climate Change. An Assessment of Vulnerability. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander L. Alusa
    • 1
  1. 1.Atmosphere UnitUnited Nations Environment ProgrammeNairobiKenya

Personalised recommendations