The 7.7 magnitude earthquake that hit Thailand and Myanmar in late March has left more than geological aftershocks.
Both countries and its closest neighbours leapt into action to provide relief and recovery, but the pace has been slow, and the lingering pain of the disaster will be felt for months, if not years. Much of the region’s critical infrastructure has been damaged, and according to the UN Development Programme (UNDP), at least 2.5m tonnes of debris – roughly 125,000 truckloads – must be removed in Myanmar before any substantial repair efforts can take place.
This is not just a amatter of heavy lifting; it’s a matter of coordination, manpower, and resources, all of which are in short supply. The earthquake devastated roads, bridges, hospitals, power grids and water supplies. The resulting logistical bottlenecks are further complicating the delivery of aid, medicine, and construction materials.
The protection gap is not just about insurance. The earthquake ran along the Saigang fault on the border of Myanmar and Thailand, which according to experts, is one of region’s most active faults, with other notable M7.3+ events in 1931 and 1946 and six M7+ events since 1930.
Despite this historical data, an estimated 1.6m buildings were in the affected areas, with most of them not built to withstand this level of seismic activity. According to the UNDP analysis, more than 10,000 homes and public service buildings – including health facilities – may have been significantly damaged or destroyed.
The gap is not just about protection and insurance, but a gap in resilience, as well. Southeast Asia is one of the most disaster-prone regions in the world, yet many of the structures and homes that people live in are not built to endure the various floods, typhoons and earthquakes that hit the region. Much of the housing stock across Myanmar, Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia, is informal or semi-formal – built incrementally, often without oversight, and typically located in high-risk zones.
The reasons are many, and well-known – a lack of resources and knowledge, underdeveloped governance and an inability to keep up with the population transfers into urban areas from rural communities. The region’s rapid urbanisation often outpaces the ability of local governments to regulate construction and ensure resilience. The region has also been a victim to climate change, which exacerbates the issues that it faces, and it was not even a major contributor to the climate crisis.
It is also important to recognise the region’s moral standing in the global climate conversation. Southeast Asia has contributed relatively little to global carbon emissions yet bears a disproportionate share of climate-related disasters. This imbalance makes international support not just a matter of charity, but of justice.
Most insurers I have talked to over the years have highlighted the difficulties in achieving real resilience in Southeast Asia’s developing nations. Private-public partnerships can only go so far, and there is only so much an insurer can achieve without some form of sweeping systemic change. A
Ahmad Zaki
Editorial director
Asia Insurance Review