Disaster Recovery Journal Summer 2025

n Reactive approach: Acting only in response to events rather than preventing them limits disaster management efforts and can lead to loss of life, greater impacts, and higher costs. n Investment in prevention: Lack of investment in preventive measures increases vulnerability to future disasters. n Communication and understanding barriers: Cultural and knowledge gaps require that messages and alerts be adapted to the cultural and linguistic characteristics of the population. n Resistance to change: Adoption of new technologies, regulations, practices, and protocols can encounter resistance in some communities. n Low resilience levels: Communities often lack the individual and collective conditions necessary to adapt to adverse circumstances, recover, and progress. 4.4 Other Significant Challenges n Lack of awareness of threats and real contexts: In some cases, detailed information about specific regional risks is unavailable, making it difficult to focus on real priorities, develop accurate prediction models, and apply effective technologies. n Financing: Studies, strategies, implementation, and maintenance of early warning systems require prior budget allocation and financial resources, which are often unavailable or given low priority. n Awareness and training: It is essential to raise awareness among stakeholders involved in disaster risk management. Similarly, they need training and education on the established solutions for early warnings. 5. Conclusions The implementation of MHEWS offers numerous benefits, ranging from the protection of human lives to reducing economic costs and enhancing community resilience. These integrated sys tems allow for more efficient risk management by addressing multiple hazards, reducing uncertainty, and optimizing decision making in emergency situations. Key benefits include:

n Reduction of loss of life and safeguarding of human lives and ecosystems. n Minimization of material damage and reduction of material losses. n Facilitation of faster and more effective responses in catastrophic situations. n Reduction of community vulnerability and potential impacts. n Environmental protection. n Optimization and efficient use of resources for care, relief, response, and recovery. n Improvement in emergency response and recovery opportunities. n Reduction of crisis management costs through anticipation, prevention, and mitigation actions. n Strengthening of community resilience. However, significant challenges remain, particularly for developing countries and especially for least developed coun tries. The effectiveness of MHEWS relies on the efforts and ini tiatives of stakeholders, determining the success of warnings in real-life situations and their impacts on civilians, infrastructure, economic activities, material assets, ecosystems, and the envi ronment. The success of MHEWS increasingly depends on the tech nologies selected for each specific case and their integration, con sidering priorities and needs, as well as the active participation of communities. Present and future trends involve the integration of new tech nologies, which, when applied reasonably and comprehensively, will improve outcomes and contribute to building a safer and more resilient society in the face of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Undoubtedly, MHEWS significantly contributes to the con struction and strengthening of resilient communities, promot ing preparation, planning, and response, which ultimately lead to better reconstruction efforts and learning for future prosper ity. v German Vargas Pedroza is currently the leader of corporate risk manage ment at Claro Colombia. He has more than 20 years of business continuity, risk management and compliance experience across several organizations. He writes papers for Latin American newspapers and magazines special ized in technology, management, risk and cybersecurity.

30 DISASTER RECOVERY JOURNAL | SUMMER 2025