‘The key thing in an emergency? Neighbours’

_{Text: Tessa Louwerens | Photography: Desiree van den Bogaard}

What do we do if there’s no electricity for three days?’ Local residents come together to consider such issues during neighbourhood sessions organised by the Rotterdam-Rijnmond safety region. To start with, they talk about the basics for survival: non-perishable food, torches and batteries – the ingredients of a traditional survival kit. But the focus soon shifts elsewhere. Someone remembers an old lady next door with mobility problems who would not be able to use her stairlift if there’s no electricity. And what about medicines that have to be kept in the fridge? The focus shifts again. Who needs help? Who could do something to help someone else?

According to Jori Kalkman, sessions like these may very well be the best form of disaster preparation. ‘We often think individually. But even if you disagree totally with your neighbour’s politics, you need each other if anything goes wrong. The key thing in an emergency is your neighbours.’

Kalkman works for the Netherlands Defence Academy and was also appointed associate professor in the Sociology of Development and Change chair group at Wageningen in July 2025. He studies how society, the emergency services and the armed forces deal with disasters and crises. How do communities respond if everyday life suddenly grinds to a halt? Who helps whom, how do people organise themselves and who may get forgotten?

‘Government campaigns focus mostly on individual preparedness – making sure you can manage for 72 hours,’ he says. ‘That may sound logical, but the scientific literature suggests otherwise. People usually get through crises not because they are well prepared, but because they get help from others. In neighbourhoods where people know and trust one another, they’re quicker to help each other. If you know the person living next door and what they might need, you’ll be in a much stronger position. Especially as friends or family often live further away. Your neighbours will generally be on the spot first.

‘What’s more, this emphasis on individual preparation can make inequality worse. For people on low incomes, putting together a 100 euro emergency kit is a significant expense. These are therefore precisely the people who are not well prepared – and they are often more vulnerable in the first place.’

The movies often show chaos and looting after disasters. That doesn’t look very helpful.

‘In about 95 per cent of cases, the opposite happens: people become more sociable and empathetic. After major disasters have passed, people sometimes even say they miss the sense of togetherness that emerged in the immediate aftermath. After the earthquakes in Turkey, neighbours and local volunteers had rescued most of the victims before the international teams arrived. Miners dug tunnels to rescue people from beneath the rubble. During the coronavirus crisis too, all sorts of initiatives started in which people helped each other.

‘It shows just how resilient societies can be. It also means that the public authorities should follow suit, for instance by giving space to neighbourhood initiatives and volunteer networks, rather than just focusing on monitoring and enforcement.’

You argue that disasters can magnify the differences between people. Why is that?

‘Take Hurricane Dorian in the Bahamas in 2019. Many of the residents were able to evacuate or get help, but illegal migrants sometimes didn’t dare ask for assistance for fear of being deported. That left them more vulnerable and they also received less support.

‘That’s a pattern we keep seeing. People with lower socioeconomic status are more likely to live in high-risk areas, they have fewer resources for making preparations, and they take longer to recover. Groups with better networks and means of communication are frequently the first to get help. Communication systems are often down after a disaster and the districts where they come back up quickest are usually the more affluent ones. That’s where the emergency services arrive first, even though more vulnerable groups are often hit harder.

‘The same natural event can therefore have very different consequences, depending on the social context. Policy choices, inequality and trust in institutions all play a part in determining who gets hit hardest. That’s how disasters can exacerbate pre-existing differences.’

How can disaster relief be made more inclusive and fairer?

‘Diversity is crucial in crisis teams. When the decisions are made by people who are from similar backgrounds, they unconsciously take themselves as the norm. You can also see that reflected in practical aspects. For example, crisis response often pays less attention to issues that primarily affect women, such as the rise in domestic violence following disasters. In some cases, emergency aid still goes via men, as they are seen as the head of the household. The result is that women – particularly single women – don’t always get the support they need. What’s more, emergency kits are often designed with the average man in mind. For a long time, they didn’t include sanitary products or powdered milk, for example.

‘It’s also important to involve the people affected by the disaster. Ask them what they need. In the aftermath of Hurricane Dorian, aid organisations delivered large amounts of food and water, but the greatest need was for fuel. Taking people seriously lets you provide help that is more effective, and you respect the victims’ dignity.’

What attracted you to this field?

‘I’ve always been fascinated by situations where everyday life suddenly gets disrupted. How do people respond? How do communities organise themselves? As a kid, I followed all the news about the tsunami in Asia. Later on, I discovered that it was a topic you could study.

‘In Wageningen, there’s a strong emphasis on local communities and how they come up with their own solutions. I find that inspiring. After disasters, you sometimes see almost utopian moments of solidarity. People suddenly start thinking more in terms of the common good, as with the earthquakes in Turkey we mentioned earlier. I often wonder how you can keep hold of that feeling, even when there isn’t a crisis.’

You also work at the Netherlands Defence Academy. Not necessarily an obvious place to find a Wageningen social scientist.

‘Humanitarian aid may not be a core task for the military, but the armed forces do often play a key role in dealing with major disasters. The Netherlands Defence Academy is a kind of mini-university within the Ministry of Defence. They carry out scientific research, and academic independence is important too. That makes it an interesting place for studying these questions. It gives me opportunities to observe practical experiences and operations that I can analyse from a social science perspective. Military personnel have a wealth of experience in operating under pressure and in unpredictable circumstances, but a social science-based understanding of crises is lacking sometimes. It’s an area where research could really make a difference, for instance by telling us how support can be tailored better to the needs of those affected.’

You wrote a book about how emergency services and the armed forces respond to crises. What dilemmas do they encounter?

‘You have to make decisions that might save lives, with very little information to base them on. Even so, emergency services are often organised in a way that prioritises consultation and coordination. During Hurricane Katrina, for example, the American army first spent a lot of time coordinating with civilian organisations, so relief efforts got off to a slow start. The coastguard sprang straight into action and rescued lots of people from rooftops and flooded homes. It may have been less efficient, but it certainly worked. The key lesson is that organisations have to be adaptable. Plans are useful, but you also have to be ready to ditch them.’

Dutch people feel relatively safe. Are we indeed well prepared?

‘We’re lucky enough that someone turns up quickly when we call the emergency number. Perhaps that makes us feel less vulnerable. We haven’t experienced many big disasters, so our awareness of the risks is limited.

‘But the risks are increasing. Extreme weather conditions are becoming more common due to climate change, resulting in more wildfires and floods. Events like these can also damage critical infrastructure and lead to prolonged power outages. Yet the Netherlands’ investments in readiness are primarily military. My worry is that we’ll soon be well prepared for war but not for climate-related crises. Those could hit us hard too.’

If you could give the policymakers a single piece of advice, what would it be?

‘Invest in social cohesion. You’re giving the impression now that it’ll be everyone for themselves if something happens, and that’s not what you want. Some people will be properly prepared, while vulnerable groups are left out in the cold.

‘Make sure people get to know each other and feel connected to their neighbourhood. The worst thing that can happen to you in a disaster is the feeling that you’re on your own. Municipalities can help by making community centres and sports clubs accessible, and by encouraging neighbourhood initiatives. The bottom line is that it’s more helpful to have people who care about you than to have an emergency kit you can’t get to because your house has collapsed.’