1. Governance and policy coherence

DRM, climate adaptation, NAPs, NDCs, development planning and sector programmes often operate through separate institutions and plans. Policies are not consistently translated into assigned responsibilities, budgets, triggers and performance indicators.

Siloed mandates, weak coordinating authority, centralized decision-making, political turnover, fragmented donor projects and weak accountability.

Delayed decisions, duplicated activities, contradictory instructions and continued investment in high-risk locations.

2. Risk knowledge and vulnerability information

Many countries lack regularly updated, high-resolution, multi-hazard risk atlases linking hazards with exposure, vulnerability, coping capacity, critical infrastructure, livelihoods and disaster losses. Data are often insufficiently disaggregated by gender, age, disability, poverty and location.

Inconsistent methods, fragmented data ownership, restricted access, weak local data collection, limited GIS and analytical capacity, and incomplete historical loss records.

Weak risk prioritization, poor impact-based forecasting, poorly designed projects and difficulty measuring resilience outcomes. UNDRR identifies disaggregated databases, scenario-building and dynamic risk planning as essential for managing compound and systemic risks.

3. Observation, forecasting and technical services

Gaps remain in weather, hydrological, radar, upper-air, ocean, seismic, landslide, glacier and urban monitoring. Many systems face data-transmission failures, coarse-resolution forecasts, limited nowcasting and weak forecast verification.

Insufficient recurrent budgets, weak operation and maintenance, difficult terrain, poor connectivity and power supply, staff shortages, high turnover and limited national research capacity.

Missed or delayed detection, short warning lead times, inaccurate local forecasts and reduced public trust.

4. Impact-based forecasting and multi-hazard early warning systems

Forecasts are not consistently converted into expected impacts, sector thresholds and protective actions. Some systems remain hazard-specific or institution-specific. Although 72% of Asia-Pacific countries reported having a multi-hazard early warning system in 2025, coverage does not guarantee that all four pillars function effectively.

Weak exposure and vulnerability data, limited cooperation between meteorological, hydrological, DRM and sector agencies, inconsistent alert standards, weak CAP interoperability and limited community validation.

Warnings may be technically correct but too general, too late or not linked to a clear decision. Risk knowledge remains the weakest global early-warning pillar, while long-term funding for operation and maintenance remains inadequate.

5. Last-mile communication and preparedness

Remote settlements, informal urban communities and marginalized groups may not receive warnings through reliable, accessible and redundant channels. Evacuation routes, shelters, local SOPs, drills and 24/7 community protection arrangements are often inadequate.

Digital divide, language and literacy barriers, inaccessible systems for persons with disabilities, network and electricity outages, weak local institutions and limited risk communication budgets.

People receive warnings without understanding what to do, where to go or who has authority to act.

6. Anticipatory action and forecast-based financing

Early action is not consistently linked to forecast triggers, pre-agreed actions, social protection, contingency procurement or automatically accessible funds. Hazard-specific Early Action Protocols remain incomplete for floods, droughts, heatwaves, cyclones, GLOFs and other rapid-onset hazards.

Fear of acting under uncertainty, rigid financial rules, absence of dedicated budget lines, weak forecast-impact evidence, unclear mandates and limited pre-disaster financing.

DRM remains predominantly reactive, increasing avoidable loss, displacement, food insecurity and emergency expenditure.

7. Transboundary and regional cooperation

Floods, droughts, cyclones, dust storms, wildfires, glacier-related hazards, coastal risks and pollution cross national borders. Regional systems often lack shared real-time data, common thresholds, joint modelling, coordinated alerts and cross-border exercises.

Sovereignty and national-security concerns, geopolitical tensions, unequal technical capacity, weak legal arrangements, data restrictions and limited financing for basin-wide systems.

Upstream information may not reach downstream countries in time, warnings may conflict and evacuation or early action may begin too late. Regular data exchange is a core requirement for operational transboundary water cooperation.

8. Local government and community capacity

Local authorities are responsible for land-use management, drainage, evacuation, shelters, public health, livelihoods and recovery, but often lack risk information, trained personnel, local emergency operations centres and predictable resources.

Fiscal centralization, limited local authority, weak local revenue, staff shortages, procurement constraints and dependence on externally funded projects.

National policies and warnings frequently weaken at provincial, district, municipal or community level. ADB estimates that subnational governments may be responsible for up to 80% of adaptation and mitigation work, while facing major capacity and financing constraints.

9. Climate and disaster risk finance

Adaptation and DRM budgets are insufficient, unpredictable and often focused on capital expenditure rather than maintenance. Risk transfer, insurance, catastrophe pools, contingent credit, parametric finance and pre-arranged recovery finance remain underdeveloped.

Large financing needs, weak risk data, difficulty measuring resilience benefits, complex climate-fund procedures, debt pressures, limited local access and uncertain private-sector returns.

Prevention is postponed, systems deteriorate and governments repeatedly rely on emergency relief and post-disaster borrowing. ADB estimates regional adaptation needs at US$102-431 billion annually, compared with approximately US$34 billion mobilized in 2021-2022.

10. Urbanization, land use and infrastructure

Rapid urban growth is increasing exposure to floods, heat, earthquakes, landslides, coastal hazards and water stress. Drainage, housing, transport, energy, telecommunications, health and water infrastructure are often not designed for changing risk conditions.

Informal settlements, land-use pressure, weak building-code enforcement, fragmented jurisdictions, poor asset data, short political cycles and inadequate operation and maintenance.

Disasters produce prolonged service disruption and cascading economic losses, not merely physical damage. Infrastructure resilience requires risk assessment across the full asset life cycle, including planning, investment, operation and maintenance.

11. Water, ecosystems and nature-based resilience

Degraded watersheds, wetlands, forests, mangroves, rangelands, groundwater and high-mountain ecosystems increase flood, drought, erosion, heat and water-security risks. Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction is not sufficiently integrated into national and local plans.

Sectoral resource management, weak environmental enforcement, insecure land tenure, competing development interests, limited valuation of ecosystem services and transboundary resource tensions.

Loss of natural buffers increases hazard intensity and undermines livelihoods, food security and long-term resilience. ADB identifies environmental degradation, rising water-related hazards and inadequate infrastructure investment as threats to water security in Asia and the Pacific.

12. Gender equality, social protection and inclusion

Women, children, older persons, persons with disabilities, migrants, ethnic and gender minorities, rural households and people living in poverty are often insufficiently represented in risk assessments, planning, warning design and decision-making.

Patriarchal governance, tokenistic participation, unequal access to assets and technology, care responsibilities, inaccessible shelters and inadequate sex-, age- and disability-disaggregated data.

Warnings, evacuation, relief and recovery measures fail to address differentiated risks. Climate and disaster impacts can deepen poverty, gender inequality, food insecurity and exclusion.

13. Compound, cascading and systemic risks

DRM institutions commonly assess hazards separately, while real events may combine heat, drought, wildfire, floods, landslides, disease outbreaks, infrastructure failure and displacement. Interdependencies among energy, water, food, transport, finance, communications and health systems are insufficiently mapped.

Single-hazard institutional structures, static models, proprietary infrastructure data, limited cross-sector exercises and absence of a clear systemic-risk owner.

A localized event can become a regional or national crisis through cascading failures. UNDRR calls for adaptive governance, dynamic multi-hazard plans, critical-infrastructure analysis and ecosystem-based approaches.

14. Response, recovery and loss and damage

Damage and loss data are often incomplete, recovery planning is fragmented, non-economic loss is poorly captured and “build back better” is not consistently enforced. Recovery finance, relocation planning, grievance mechanisms and learning from disasters remain weak.

Political pressure for rapid visible reconstruction, weak baseline asset data, fragmented humanitarian-development systems, insecure land tenure, inadequate risk transfer and limited long-term finance.

Reconstruction may reproduce the same exposure and vulnerability, while repeated disasters cause debt, displacement, livelihood erosion and development setbacks.