Strengthening Disaster Risk Governance: Valuable Lessons from the 9th IABI PIT at UMY
The 9th Annual Scientific Meeting (PIT) of the Indonesian Disaster Experts Association, held at Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta from 6-8 May 2026, is more than just an ordinary academic forum. With the theme “Strengthening Disaster Risk Governance for Resilience”, this event offers profound reflections on the direction of disaster management in Indonesia amid escalating threats from hydrometeorological, geological, and non-natural disasters. Indonesia, living on the world’s Ring of Fire, at the convergence of three major tectonic plates, and with its geographical complexity, is one of the most disaster-prone countries globally.
In such circumstances, disaster management cannot be viewed merely as an emergency response when disasters strike. Disaster management must become an integral part of government governance, regional development, university research, and everyday societal culture.
The 9th PIT IABI is important because it brings together academics, researchers, practitioners, government officials, volunteers, and communities in a substantial knowledge-sharing space. The forum reminds us that disaster risk reduction will not succeed if pursued partially. Resilience can only be built through sustained collaboration among stakeholders: central government, local governments, universities, the business world, media, and society.
In this context, a major message emerging from various speakers is the importance of strengthening leadership that understands disaster risks. Indonesia actually has valuable experiences that can serve as national lessons. One of them is the successful handling of the post-Yogyakarta earthquake on 27 May 2006.
The major earthquake that shook the Special Region of Yogyakarta and parts of Central Java at that time caused thousands of fatalities, damage to homes, public facilities, and paralysis of community economic activities. However, what is interesting is that the recovery process proceeded relatively quickly.
Within about two years, the pulse of community life was moving again. Recovery was not only physical but also social and economic. This success did not arise by chance. Leadership factors became the main key. Hamengkubuwono X demonstrated how a regional leader who understands the character of the community and disaster risks can mobilise collective solidarity.
Leadership that is present among the people, able to build public trust, and coordinate various elements becomes the foundation for accelerating recovery. At the same time, the central government also showed a swift response. Jusuf Kalla is known as a figure who is quick, pragmatic, and responsive in crisis situations. An approach that is straightforward accelerated the rehabilitation and reconstruction process. The combination of local leadership that understands the local context and responsive national leadership becomes an important lesson in disaster risk governance in Indonesia.
Unfortunately, this positive experience has not fully become institutionalised national learning. In many recent disaster cases, we still witness weak coordination, slow decision-making, overlapping authorities, and minimal perspectives on disaster risk reduction in regional development. Even, not a few regional heads or national elites view disaster management only as a technical matter for certain agencies.
Such a perspective is dangerous; disasters are not merely the affair of BPBD or BNPB alone. Disasters are issues of spatial planning, environmental living, education, health, poverty, infrastructure development, and political governance. It is here that the criticisms emerging in scientific forums like PIT IABI become relevant.
Power politics often makes public positions determined more by electoral compromises than by the capacity to understand societal issues, including disasters. As a result, many leaders lack sensitivity to disaster risks. Development programmes often ignore environmental carrying capacity. Land conversion continues to occur, disaster-prone areas are turned into settlements and investment zones without adequate mitigation.
In fact, disaster risk reduction requires leaders who think long-term. Resilience is not built overnight but through consistent policies, ongoing public education, and the courage to make decisions that may not be politically popular. In the context of national development, disaster issues have not yet become a mainstream state policy.
In the Joko Widodo administration era through the NawaCita agenda, development focus was more directed towards infrastructure development, connectivity, bureaucratic reform, and strengthening the national economy. Although there are various programmes related to mitigation and disaster management, the issue of disaster risk reduction has not appeared as a primary strategic priority in the national development vision.
A similar thing is seen in the Asta Cita agenda of the Prabowo Subianto administration. The major focus still revolves around food security, energy, industrial downstreaming, defence, and economic growth. Yet Indonesia faces increasingly complex disaster threats due to climate change, urbanisation, and environmental degradation. This condition shows that disaster management is often still positioned as a sectoral issue, not the foundation of national development. Consequently, investments in mitigation, preparedness, disaster education, and strengthening regional capacity have not received as much attention as other development sectors. Yet the success of economic development can collapse in hours when a major disaster occurs.
The theme of Strengthening Disaster Risk Governance for Resilience actually reminds us that…