Indonesian's risk perception towards terrorist's bomb attack
\nJP\/6\/WIWAN<\/p>\n
Indonesian's risk perception towards terrorist's bomb attack<\/p>\n
Antonius Wiwan Koban
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
"Serious security threats from terrorists to all Americans &
\nWesterners in Indonesia. Avoid visiting western country
\nembassies, western pedestrians...." Foreign residents and
\ntourists in Indonesia, especially in Jakarta, are very familiar
\nwith that kind of warning message which is circulated officially
\nby the embassies or unofficially from person to person via short
\nmessage services (SMSs) or e-mails and mailing lists.<\/p>\n
That sentence is a kind of current warning message targeted to
\nforeigners living in Indonesia. But how about the Indonesian
\npeople themselves? Are they also aware about the same threats in
\nthe same areas? What is their perception about security threats
\nin Indonesia? How do Indonesians perceive the probability of
\nbecoming the victims of terrorist attacks?<\/p>\n
To mention the terrorists' bomb attack incidents, as we
\nnotice, the "top five" bomb attacks during the years 2000-2005 in
\nJakarta and Bali have killed hundreds of people and injured many
\nmore.<\/p>\n
Terror bomb attacks could occur at any time and could be
\ndirected at any location. For most people, they never know when
\nand where the incident might take place. It is a probability.
\nPerception about the probability of something we do not want to
\nhappen but might happen is a risk perception.<\/p>\n
Risk perception towards the terrorists' bomb attacks, as the
\nother risk perception in general, can be seen as two components.<\/p>\n
The first one is the perception about the probability of the
\nseverity of the incident. The second one is the perception about
\nthe probability of that risk that would really happen. It is
\nabout perceived vulnerability. Each of us has our own self-
\nvulnerability risk perception.<\/p>\n
A rough description about how Indonesian citizens perceive the
\nprobability of terrorist's bomb attacks is reflected in the
\nsecurity check procedures in public buildings such as office
\nbuildings, hotels and shopping centers in Jakarta.<\/p>\n
Firstly, let us see risk perception in the physical sense. At
\na glance, most of those public buildings in Jakarta now have been
\nequipped with security check portals. When they were built, and
\nhow they were built reflected the dynamics of the building's
\nmanagement risk perception. Earlier it was built as an early
\nwarning system to increase the awareness of the terrorist
\nattacks.<\/p>\n
Some portals have been changed from temporary to permanent. If
\nbudget constraints do not matter, in the case of a temporary
\nsecurity check portal, it can be suspected that terrorist attacks
\nare perceived as temporary threats. Or maybe it was built just as
\nformality on orders or instructions without any risk awareness
\nconsideration. Recently in Jakarta, we see that most buildings
\ntreat their security portals as temporary constructions.<\/p>\n
Secondly, then let us see risk perception as reflected in the
\nmental way. As a routine on a daily basis activity, security
\ncheck procedures might be done slightly. It is a very usual scene
\nthat we see the security crews just slightly check visitor's
\nstuff. The potential cognitive error is the procedures to screen
\nany dangerous stuff, since so far they find nothing, might be
\ntaken as "looking for anything and guessing it is impossible to
\nfind". That way can lead them to underestimate risk perception.<\/p>\n
As bomb attacks increase, levels of risk perception about
\nprobability of being attacked by terrorists' bombings should be
\nincreased too. But people often have optimistic biases about
\nself-vulnerability. When judged about their own chances, people
\nclaim that they are less likely to be affected or to become
\nvictims than others.<\/p>\n
Indonesians feel helpless and vulnerable because the
\nuncertainty of the bombers' targets. Because of the bomb
\nincidents in Indonesia look like there is no special target,
\nwhich means the bombers did not care about whom their bombs
\nvictimized, so most people think there is no difference whether
\nthey think seriously about their probability to be under attack
\nor do not think about it.<\/p>\n
Indonesians sometimes also have become so accustomed to
\nhelplessness that it leads them to underestimate risk perception.
\nThe Indonesian lay people often think that all of the bomb attack
\nthreats are out of their personal control. Then they would agree
\nthat it is all about faith, "being under attack or to die is
\nfate. If God wishes us to die, then we will die. Only God knows
\nwhen, where and to whom it would happen".<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, this belief sometimes turns out to be a
\njustification that the risk is uncontrollable so any effort to
\nprevent it would be useless. To avoid this, self-efficacy should
\nbe increased, for example, by having proper equipment and by
\nhaving proper early warning in structural levels and also by
\nundertaking appropriate emergency responses exercised on a
\npersonal level.<\/p>\n
The same belief, fortunately, also can be a good entry point
\nto educate the public on risk awareness. The critical point is if
\npeople believe that no one will know the time, place and the
\ntarget of the bomb attack, they should always be aware of the
\nuncertainty. That is the very meaning of life, it is a risk.<\/p>\n
The writer is a Social Researcher at the Indonesian Institute
\nin Jakarta. He can be reached at antonwk@cbn.net.id<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesians-risk-perception-towards-terrorists-bomb-attack-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}