There is one important lesson from every disaster: the public needs\ninformation that tells them what to do when facing a disaster. In risk\ncommunication, calm is not the opposite of vigilance. The two must go\nhand in hand.<\/p>\n
The eruption of Mount Anak Krakatau once again reminds us of\nIndonesia\u2019s character as a country that lives side by side with\ngeological dynamics. For the people of Banten and Lampung, the name Anak\nKrakatau also carries a strong collective memory of the Sunda Strait\ntsunami in December 2018. Therefore, the sound of rumblings, tremors,\neruption glow, or news about volcanic ash can quickly trigger anxiety.\nSuch a reaction is understandable. However, in situations like this,\npublic decisions must be guided by verified data, not by fear amplified\nby unconfirmed information.<\/p>\n
\u2018The goal of risk communication is not to make the public feel that\nthere is no danger. The goal is to help the public understand the danger\nproportionally, know protective actions, and remain able to make\ndecisions calmly.\u2019<\/p>\n
What do we know at present?<\/p>\n
Based on official information from the Ministry of Energy and Mineral\nResources\/PVMBG on 6 September 2026, the continuous eruption earthquake\nepisode of Mount Anak Krakatau, which began to be recorded on Friday, 4\nSeptember at 23.07 WIB, stopped on Sunday, 6 September at 00.04 WIB.\nAfterwards, one Strombolian-type follow-up eruption was recorded at\n03.53 WIB with a duration of about 30 seconds. Although the continuous\nepisode has ended, volcanic dynamics remain active and the status of\nMount Anak Krakatau remains at Level III (Siaga). PVMBG emphasised that\nthe potential for further eruptions remains high, with hazards that may\ninclude ejection of incandescent rocks, heavy ashfall, and the\npossibility of lava flows if continuous eruptions resume.<\/p>\n
At the same time, volcanic ash has caused real impacts beyond the\nmountain itself. BNPB reported ash distribution in several areas of\nBanten, including seven sub-districts in Serang Regency: Anyer,\nCinangka, Ciomas, Mancak, Pabuaran, Baros, and Padarincang. On the\nmorning of 6 September 2026, four airports experienced temporary\nclosures at different time intervals as a flight safety measure.<\/p>\n
Flight operational status is dynamic and must always be checked\nthrough operators and aviation authorities.<\/p>\n
BMKG on 6 September 2026 also reported 24-hour atmospheric\nmonitoring. Satellite image analysis at 08.00 WIB identified two\nclusters of ash distribution covering Banten, DKI Jakarta, West Java,\nand as far as Bengkulu. Ash distribution differs according to altitude\nlayers and continues to change following eruption activity as well as\nwind direction and speed. This fact is important: the presence of ash in\nthe atmosphere does not mean all areas beneath its path experience\nsurface exposure with the same intensity.<\/p>\n
The memory of the 2018 tsunami makes every increase in Anak Krakatau\nactivity easily associated with a tsunami threat. But responsible risk\ncommunication must distinguish between memory of past events and hazard\nevaluation under current conditions.<\/p>\n
The Geological Agency\/PVMBG evaluation states that the body of Mount\nAnak Krakatau, which has regrown after the 22 December 2018 event, is\nstill relatively small and, based on current evaluation, does not have\nthe potential to collapse on a scale that could trigger a tsunami. BMKG\nalso reported that monitoring of 20 tsunami gauge sensors around the\nSunda Strait until 07.00 WIB on 6 September 2026 showed no sea level\nanomalies; HF Radar analysis at that time indicated a low tsunami\nprobability. This is reassuring information, but not a reason to ignore\npreparedness. Volcanic conditions are dynamic and continue to be\nevaluated by technical agencies.<\/p>\n
Coastal communities are not being asked to panic. They are being\nasked to be ready, to understand official information sources, to\nrecognise evacuation routes, and to follow BPBD instructions if\nconditions change.<\/p>\n
Volcanic ash is not merely \u2018ordinary dust\u2019. It is composed of fine\nvolcanic material particles that can be carried by the wind. Its impact\ndepends greatly on ash concentration, particle size, duration of\nexposure, weather conditions, and individual vulnerability.<\/p>\n
WHO explains that ash exposure can cause eye and skin irritation as\nwell as respiratory problems, and ash can also contaminate water and\nfood. Therefore, public health messages should not be frightening, but\noperational: reduce exposure, protect airways and eyes, maintain water\nand food hygiene, and seek medical help if experiencing concerning\nsymptoms.<\/p>\n
Children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with respiratory or\ncardiovascular conditions need to minimise ash exposure and follow\nhealth workers\u2019 advice. Families, schools, public facility managers, and\nlocal government need to ensure that more vulnerable groups are not left\nbehind in mask distribution, information access, and health\nservices.<\/p>\n
My experience researching disaster risk communication shows that a\ncrisis produces not only a need for physical safety, but also a need for\ninformation certainty. When the information space is filled with video\nclips without context, old screenshots, predictions without scientific\nbasis, or sensational headlines, the public can make wrong decisions:\npanic, make unnecessary journeys, approach dangerous locations, or even\nignore official warnings.<\/p>\n
This is where the principle of stakeholder engagement becomes\nimportant. Disaster communication cannot be handled by a single\ninstitution. PVMBG\/Geological Agency provides technical volcanological\nauthority; BMKG monitors the atmosphere, weather, earthquakes and\ntsunami monitoring systems; BNPB and BPBD coordinate preparedness and\nresponse; the Ministry of Health and health facilities handle health\naspects; transport authorities manage travel safety; the media\ntranslates information for the public; while community leaders, schools,\ncommunities, KOLs, and local networks help ensure messages reach\ndifferent groups.<\/p>\n
In high-risk situations, speed of information is important, but speed\nwithout accuracy can add to the problem. The government needs to work on\nthe principle of: one consistent technical data set, periodic updates,\neasily understood language, explanation of what is known and what is\nstill being monitored, and instructions that the public can immediately\nact upon.<\/p>\n
The message \u2018remain calm\u2019 must also not stand alone. It must be\naccompanied by reasons and actions. The public will be calmer when they\nknow: what is happening, what the impact is for their area, what to do,\nwhere to seek information, and what the government will do if the\nsituation changes. This is the difference between communication that\nmerely conveys information and communication that builds public\ncapacity.<\/p>\n
One weakness of disaster communication is when we assume all citizens\nreceive information through smartphones and social media. In reality,\ndisasters can cut off electricity, degrade mobile network quality, and\nmake some communities, especially in villages, small islands, coastal\nareas, mountains, and elderly groups, unreachable by digital channels.\nTherefore, the risk communication principle I consider important is\nmulti-channel, redundant, localised, and trusted: one official message\nmust be disseminated through several channels simultaneously, using\nlocal language that is easily understood, and delivered by parties\ntrusted by the community.<\/p>\n
Practice in Indonesia shows that simple technology remains highly\nrelevant. BNPB has used local radio networks for disaster literacy\nbecause radio can reach communities in areas difficult for other media\nto reach. BNPB also encourages the use of kentongan (bamboo slit drums),\nmosque loudspeakers, church bells, and sirens as part of community-based\nearly warning systems. The UNESCO-IOC Tsunami Ready example in Penurunan\nVillage, Bengkulu, even combines BMKG digital warnings with mosque\nloudspeakers and kentongan. The main lesson is simple: traditional\nchannels are not a replacement for digital technology, but a safety\nlayer when digital technology does not reach everyone.<\/p>\n
Effective for areas with limited internet, can broadcast periodic\nupdates, interviews with BPBD\/experts, health instructions, and hoax\nclarifications in language close to the community.<\/p>\n
Very important at village\/kelurahan level because of social proximity\nand direct voice reach. Messages must be short, verified,\nnon-sensational, and sourced from BPBD\/local government.<\/p>\n
Suitable for danger signals or evacuation calls agreed upon by the\ncommunity. The meaning of each sound pattern must be socialised and\npractised beforehand to avoid confusion.<\/p>\n
Can reach hamlets, coastal areas, scattered settlements, markets,\nsmall ports, and areas with weak telecommunications signals.<\/p>\n
Becomes a link between villages, command posts, volunteers,\nofficials, and BPBD when mobile communication is disrupted. Such\nnetworks also allow field information to move in two directions.<\/p>\n
They are a \u2018human communication network\u2019 that can ensure messages are\ntruly received, understood, and passed on to residents who are not\nactive media users.<\/p>\n
For communities that still have telecommunications access,\nlocation-based short messages and WhatsApp groups\/official channels can\naccelerate the dissemination of updates. Digital messages need to be\nconsistent with messages delivered through offline channels.<\/p>\n
Functions to expand reach, provide context from official sources, and\nprevent information vacuums that are easily filled by speculation.<\/p>\n
Used for rapid updates, infographics, short videos, maps, FAQs, and\ndebunking. Content must be easy to re-share by local government, media,\nKOLs, communities, and local networks.<\/p>\n
Still needed at village offices, community health centres, schools,\nmarkets, terminals, ports, evacuation sites, and public service points,\nespecially when digital access is limited.<\/p>\n
\u2018In an emergency, the best communication channel is not always the\nmost sophisticated channel, but the channel most likely to be received,\ntrusted, understood, and immediately turned into action by the\ncommunity.\u2019<\/p>\n
To avoid confusion, all channels must carry the same substance: what\nis happening, which areas are affected, what to do, what not to do,\nofficial information sources, and when the next update will be given.\nCentral messages need to be translated into local context by BPBD and\nlocal government without changing technical facts. For areas with\nlanguage diversity, information also needs to be delivered in regional\nlanguages or easily understood audio forms.<\/p>\n
Most importantly, communication must be two-way. Community radio,\nvolunteers, village officials, health centres, schools, and community\nleaders are not only message deliverers, but also \u2018social sensors\u2019 that\nprovide feedback: whether masks are available, whether there are\nresidents who have not received information, whether rumours are\nemerging, whether vulnerable groups need assistance, and whether\ngovernment instructions are understood. Thus, stakeholder engagement\ntruly works as a risk communication system, not merely a list of parties\ninvolved.<\/p>\n
Do not conclude risk solely from sounds, videos, or social media\nposts.<\/p>\n
Obey the 3 km radius, reduce ash exposure, and prepare yourself if\nnew directives are issued.<\/p>\n
Prioritise PVMBG\/Geological Agency, BMKG, BNPB\/BPBD, and relevant\nofficial authorities.<\/p>\n
The December 2018 Banten tsunami taught that disasters can develop\nvery quickly, while the public needs clear messages amid uncertainty. In\nthe book I wrote about tsunami risk communication through stakeholder\nengagement, I positioned stakeholder involvement not as a complement,\nbut as part of the safety system. Information must move from technical\nagencies to local government, media, communities, families, and\nindividuals, and at the same time, reports from the field must be able\nto return to the decision-making system.<\/p>\n
Today, that lesson remains relevant. Monitoring technology is\nimproving, information channels are multiplying, but communication\nchallenges are also becoming more complex. The speed of social media\nmeans correct information and incorrect information can circulate at the\nsame pace. Therefore, risk literacy becomes a very important public\ncapability: not overreacting, not underestimating, and being able to\ndistinguish official sources from speculation.<\/p>\n
We cannot stop natural processes, but we can reduce their risks\nthrough science, preparedness, good communication, and solidarity. At\nthe time this article was written, the continuous eruption episode had\nended, but Level III (Siaga) status still applies and monitoring\ncontinues. So the most appropriate attitude is neither panic nor\nindifference.<\/p>\n
Remain calm. Protect yourself from ash exposure. Obey the danger\nzone. Check travel conditions before departing. Know evacuation routes\nif you live in a coastal area. And no less important: do not spread\nunverified information.<\/p>\n
\u2018In risk communication, the strongest calm is calm born of knowledge.\nThe most effective vigilance is vigilance that knows what to do.\u2019<\/p>\n
The state, technical agencies, local government, media, communities,\nand the public have complementary roles. When official information is\ntrusted, understood, and translated into simple actions, public\ncommunication does not merely reassure; it becomes part of disaster\nmitigation itself.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/anak-krakatau-volcanic-ash-calm-does-not-mean-complacent-1788709848", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }