Bangkok Earthquake Experts Urge: Prepare Now for Potential Disaster
The earth shifted, and Bangkok felt it. The recent earthquake emanating from Myanmar, while not directly causing widespread devastation in the Thai capital, has served as a potent reminder: seismic risk is not merely a theoretical concern, but a tangible vulnerability. A recent conference, the Bangkok Post Knowledge Forum 2025, titled "After the Quake: From Lessons to Prevention. What We Must Know When the World Shifts,' convened experts to unpack these risks and discuss strategies for mitigation, as detailed in these recent findings. The discussions highlighted a complex interplay of geological realities, engineering standards, and, perhaps most critically, communication gaps.
While the immediate threat of another quake originating from the Sagaing Fault might be statistically low, the long-term picture is more concerning. Experts identified other major fault lines—the Kanchanaburi Fault and the Arakan Subduction Zone—as potential sources of earthquakes that could significantly impact Bangkok. The city’s unique geology, sitting as it does on a soft soil basin, further exacerbates the risk. Seismic waves, even from distant earthquakes, can be amplified as they pass through this basin, potentially increasing the severity of ground shaking.
Sansiri Plc, a major property developer, swiftly conducted safety checks after the March 28 quake, finding only minor exterior damage in most of their projects and assisting thousands with insurance claims. While this provides a degree of reassurance regarding current construction, it also raises questions about the baseline standards and the need for continuous improvement. The president of the Thailand Structural Engineers Association called the quake an opportunity to review and improve existing standards, addressing regulatory gaps to bolster public confidence. But, as always, the devil is in the details. Are the current standards sufficiently robust to withstand the amplified seismic waves unique to Bangkok’s geology? Are the enforcement mechanisms adequate to ensure compliance across all construction projects, especially smaller or less regulated developments?
And perhaps the most pressing concern: even with structurally sound buildings, is the public adequately prepared for a seismic event? This is where the communication breakdown comes into sharp focus.
As Assoc Prof Alongkorn Parivudhiphongs pointed out, the lack of a comprehensive emergency response plan and the proliferation of misinformation on social media created widespread panic after the recent quake. This is a systemic issue that demands a multi-pronged approach.
Here are some of the key elements that need addressing:
- Improved Early Warning Systems: A reliable, centralized warning system is crucial, but it needs to go beyond simply alerting the public.
- Public Education: The system must provide clear, actionable information about what to do during and after an earthquake. Basic understanding of engineering concepts and geographical awareness should be integrated into public education initiatives.
- Combating Misinformation: Developing strategies to manage algorithmic challenges and combat the spread of fake news on online platforms is essential for effective crisis communication.
- Regular Drills and Simulations: Implementing regular earthquake drills and simulations can help familiarize the public with emergency procedures and build confidence in their ability to respond effectively.
The forum highlighted a crucial paradox: While engineering and construction may be adequately prepared for specific, modeled scenarios, the public preparedness and communication infrastructure are lagging, creating a vulnerability gap that could turn a manageable seismic event into a crisis.
This requires a fundamental shift in thinking. Earthquake preparedness is not just about stronger buildings; it’s about building a more resilient society. It’s about ensuring that every citizen, from schoolchildren to policymakers, understands the risks, knows what to do, and has access to accurate information. Bangkok’s recent seismic wake-up call needs to be a catalyst for systemic change, bridging the gap between risk and readiness.
