Economic Barriers to Preparedness are Creations of the State

We live in challenging economic times, here in Canada our unemployment rate has hit a near decade high, inflation remains a concern and past price inflation has closed whatever flexibility gap existed in the average family budget. There seems no end to the insatiable hunger for more taxation at all levels of government, while corporate Canada is trimming the headcount in preparation for navigating the coming recession. This is the world we live in, whether we concur with it, or can agree on the measures that led us here.

This is a difficult time for Canadian families, likely replicable across most developed nations. Prosperity seems far off and the continuous onslaught of exogenous hazards keeps many up at night. Whether individuals feel the pressure of the political and economic instability, or they feel uneasy with the ongoing cultural and ideological clashes, we live in a seemingly unstable and uncertain world, trajectory unknown. Add to that pot of uncomfortableness the continued series of natural events and we’ve got a recipe for anxiety and stress.

The Stoic philosophers of old provided sage advice for times of uncertainty, offering that we need to understand and embrace how little we control. In simplistic terms, as an individual I control what I say (verbal, writing, social media) and what I do (physical actions, life decisions). Everything else is due to forces beyond my control and as a much repeated phrase, Amor Fati, I need to accept those outcomes. Not enjoy or like them, but understand that how I choose to react, how I choose to manage emotions and response is my responsibility. I can control little and that is perfect, the remainder will be what will be and I’ll adjust.

It’s that adjust which forms the foundation of what we refer to in modern times as the field of preparedness. Often used in simplistic terms as readying oneself for natural hazards - typical disasters, we know that preparedness in a much broader phenomenon encompassing life. It’s a lifestyle that includes the cognitive and physical actions - as per the Stoics - that enable you to navigate any exogenous shock. In the modern sense, that is viewed as disruptions originating in one of the five areas of influence - political, economic, cultural / ideological, natural and familial. Preparedness is not something that can be anointed or provided by an external entity. It is a lens for life, a worldview, something adopted by an individual, no different than many other personal theoretical lens - feminism, globalism, environmentalism, etc.

To adopt a cognitive focus is a choice, once we often arrive at after a series of life experiences, advice from a stalwart trusted source or through inquiry. It is a framework for how we choose to view the world, we assess events through this frame, to understand how they impact our worldview, our lives and from that, we determine whether there are any personal course corrections necessary to adapt to a changing reality. Often easy to understand in conversations, debates and discourse with others, how they choose to describe issues, assigning responsibilities and offering ideas to ameliorate harm. Unconsciously we weave our worldview into our daily activities.

Whether we consider the latest OECD reports, recent literature or read the general malaise of social media, we exist in a period of reduced institutional trust. As a result of decisions in the pandemic and the surge of mis and disinformation online, there is a very small window of trust and attention that the government may command. As such, even considering the efforts to rebuild that trust, it must be judiciously managed. We know that near 30% of Canadians have trust in the Federal government or Canadian media.

If the government wishes to engage the population on any important issue, they are beginning from a position of distrust, or at least uncertainty. Often the best descriptor is that individuals will seek the motive behind the crisis communications, the underlying intent of the message originator, vice the desired outcome of trusting the information and adopting the suggested behavoirs. The population doesn’t see emergency management in a disaster as an exemption to that trust, but another agency of the Crown offering advice.

We know that in times of crisis and chaos individuals turn to their trusted sources for information. Literature indicates that this trust is built over time, lost easily and difficult to rebuild. To maintain that trust requires a concerted effort, longitudinal and valuable, to engage the targeted population. Not too different from marketing, a government wishing to be seen as a valuable resource in a crisis must first establish that bond in times of peace and calm.

Individuals anoint trust, it is not allocated alongside an authoritative title or because of a crested polo shirt at a news conference.

The public sector resident facing preparedness communications have been the subject of a number of previous articles, blogs and podcast episodes outlining the state of the current message. With a small window of attention, it is incumbent for the message originator to provide value, along a trusted network to the target audience.

One notable concern is the advocacy for the acquisition of supplies to survive the event. A review of the literature indicates a lack of evidence to support the argument that the possession of kit and equipment are correlated with better post event outcomes. In Canada, over the last twenty years, the total number of individuals who perished or were significantly injured by a hazard or response induced need of a lack of fresh water, food or listed emergency kit supplies is nil. When we correlate these ideas - the economic reality of Canadian families and the advocacy for purchasing goods within preparedness communications, we can trace the origin of the belief that an economic barrier exists to preparedness. When the State indicates that the acquisition of physical goods are correlated to better outcomes through preparedness and the population remains under significant financial pressure, we create a situation where citizens would rightly see preparedness as having an economic cost. Adding preparedness to the expense column of a family budget means that it is in competition with food, housing, medical, education and a host of other expenses under pressure.

It is not that the population sees preparedness as unnecessary, but when associated as a cost element for a family, most are choosing to maintain more realtime budgetary requirements. Preparedness is future proofing, supper is today. If we correlate a cost to preparedness, we create an offramp, the easy button to choose not to adopt a prepared life as it is outside our current economic conditions.

The State creates the economic barrier in preparedness and then reinforces it as a selection on surveys. Offer a respondent the opportunity to indicate that something is important but unachievable due to economic conditions beyond their control, and they will do so in a statistically significant way. Simple logic and psychology. The individual feels better about themselves by assigning the blame for not adopting preparedness to the economy, not too different from the response to climate change arguments - I would do what I perceive as the right thing, but it costs money I don’t have access to, so I will hold the beliefs, feel good about myself and carry on.

Preparedness for disasters is a niche and interesting gateway to the overall phenomenon, a way to ground individuals in a new worldview, a reflective exercise expressed in the words of the stoics. Being ready to navigate events from the five areas of influence is an exercise in education, strategy and human relationships - not money.

Significant barriers to adopting preparedness exist, but access to financial resources is not one of those. It is unfortunate that one of the obstacles to overcome is the government.