Like most problems of this general nature, the practical solution would probably have both an educational component and an enforcement component. If education by itself would be effective, that would be excellent, but these articles are suggesting that it may be necessary to increase the penalty/enforcement part.

Now, for example, consider two ways of enforcing safe speed limits. The way we do it (in US, at least) is to set a specific speed limit, with a 3-digit fine for violation, and fairly frequent enforcement. We could have done this this differently: we could have said, "Drive as fast as you want, but if your speed gets you into an accident, you pay a $50,000 fine." The second method might be more appealing to some, but I don't think that would have been an effective law enforcement policy, because people are bad judges of risks and low probability events.

Right now, the potential threat of a huge payment for SAR services in the case of an extremely unlikely event seems like the second method - hard to make an impression on casual hikers.

I wonder if something like this might help - although the big-brotherish aspects of it are concerning. Suppose there was a sign at popular trailheads that said, "$25 fine if you are found on this trail without a water bottle and a flashlight." It would immediately start educating people in a more concrete and immediate way that hiking without a few essentials is malpractice. Sort of like a seatbelt law for hiking.

I don't know if this would actually be a good idea, but I think it might be more effective than expecting clueless hikers to read about a big fine that once a year someone in the country had to pay for SAR.