Why don’t people always act on early warnings?
The role of risk communication in bridging the gap from early warning to early action
Early warnings save lives – but only if people act on them. Around the world, alerts about floods, storms, heatwaves and other hazards are becoming more accurate. Yet too often, people delay or ignore advice to evacuate, prepare, or change their behaviour. Why?
Research and behavioural science show that human decisions under risk are shaped by far more than information:
- Cognitive biases – People underestimate their own risk or delay action if a threat feels uncertain.
- Social and cultural influences – Community norms, faith, or traditions may discourage preparedness.
- Trust and credibility – Warnings may be dismissed if the source is not trusted, or if past false alarms created “warning fatigue.”
- Capacity constraints – Many households lack the means to evacuate, reinforce homes, or purchase supplies.
- Information gaps – Messages may be too technical, unclear, or fail to specify what concrete steps people can take.
Flood warnings in Somalia
In late 2023, severe flooding struck Somalia following the El Niño weather system. Research by BBC Media Action under the RiCA project showed that nearly all participants in Baidoa and Mogadishu received early warnings through radio, TV and social media.
While people found the warnings clear and timely – including advice to boil water, avoid floodwaters, and evacuate if needed – most did not follow them. Reported reasons included:
- Belief that forecasting weather interfered with God’s will.
- Distrust of the information or its sources.
- Fears of insecurity if leaving their settlements.
- Insufficient resources to take the recommended actions.
I thought that these people are committing sin by talking about the rain, which is something that is given by Allah. I did not know that there is a science of weather forecasting.
Explanation by a participant
Beyond warnings: Audience-centred risk communication
The challenge is not only about making early warnings louder or faster. It is about ensuring they are understood, trusted, and acted upon.
A crucial lesson is that trust cannot be built in the middle of a crisis. People are far more likely to act if they already trust the source – and that trust grows out of regular, two-way communication in times of peace.
Effective risk communication therefore requires long-term, audience-centred strategies that:
- Build credibility and trust between institutions and communities before hazards strike.
- Enable dialogue and listening, so people can share concerns, question information, and co-create solutions.
- Support inclusive decision-making by respecting local knowledge and lived experience.
- Shift social norms and behaviours around preparedness, resilience, and prevention.
By investing in communication that is continuous, participatory, and people-centred, institutions can strengthen relationships with communities – ensuring that when warnings come, they are not only heard, but acted upon.
What you’ll find in the Risk Communication Hub
This Hub is a practical resource for communicators, policymakers, media and community leaders who want to close the gap between risk knowledge and risk action. Inside, you’ll find:
Research tools and approaches to better understand audiences – methods to study how people perceive risk, what shapes their decisions, and how to engage diverse groups effectively.
Practical steps to plan and implement communication strategies – from design to delivery, rooted in evidence and experience.
A focus on continuous improvement – testing, feedback loops, monitoring and evaluation to refine and strengthen approaches over time.
Practical examples to inspire you – case studies and stories that show what works (and why) in different contexts.
Explore the Hub to learn how to design communication strategies that connect with people’s realities — and help turn warnings and knowledge into action.