This article reviews the main insights from selected literature on risk perception, particularly in connection with natural hazards. It includes numerous case studies on perception and social behavior dealing with floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, wild fires, and landslides. The review reveals that personal experience of a natural hazard and trust--or lack of trust--in authorities and experts have the most substantial impact on risk perception. Cultural and individual factors such as media coverage, age, gender, education, income, social status, and others do not play such an important role but act as mediators or amplifiers of the main causal connections between experience, trust, perception, and preparedness to take protective actions. When analyzing the factors of experience and trust on risk perception and on the likeliness of individuals to take preparedness action, the review found that a risk perception paradox exists in that it is assumed that high risk perception will lead to personal preparedness and, in the next step, to risk mitigation behavior. However, this is not necessarily true. In fact, the opposite can occur if individuals with high risk perception still choose not to personally prepare themselves in the face of a natural hazard. Therefore, based on the results of the review, this article offers three explanations suggesting why this paradox might occur. These findings have implications for future risk governance and communication as well as for the willingness of individuals to invest in risk preparedness or risk mitigation actions.
The risk perception paradox illustrates the perception of natural hazards as not directly related to a willingness to act or engage in precautionary behavior. Yet the utilization of participatory processes can help to overcome this gap. In a practical example in the watershed of the Danube River and its contributing streams in Germany, we aimed to solve questions about the value of participatory modeling as a method to bridge the gap linked to flood polder planning and a relocation of a dike for protection against high floods (centennial floods and rarer). Local communities, citizen initiatives, and nongovernmental environmental organizations joined together for round table discussions initiated by the water management authorities. A participatory modeling process enabled these diverse stakeholders to engage with the experts who built the groundwater models for the planning process. As part of this study, two case studies are presented. In the first example, neutral mediators assisted the round table ''Flood Polder Katzau (Danube)'' in order to cultivate mutual trust and understanding between the authorities and the former opponents of the project. This process is still ongoing, challenged by long-term planning and the more immediate obstacle of current political changes. The second case study is located on the river Alz, a tributary of the river Inn, which flows into the Danube, where the relocation of a dike was planned. This article demonstrates how participatory modeling contributes to bridging the gap between a local resident's risk perception and real action in the case of flood preparedness. Keywords Bavaria Á Flood hazard Á Flood perception Á Flood risk Á Germany Á Participatory modeling Á Precautionary action DIALOGIK is a nonprofit institute for communication and cooperation research founded by Professor Dr. Ortwin Renn. Two major subjects of the institute are participation research and natural hazards. DHI is a global consulting and software company with more than 50 years' experience on water systems. DHI WASY GmbH is the German 100% subsidiary company of DHI.
This paper aims to provide a comprehensive picture of risk governance and conceptualize an approach to dealing with multi-risks in the Metropolitan Region of Lima, Peru. We argue that the impacts of extreme events are not solely determined by a given place-based vulnerability and risk profile but are considerably influenced by cascading effects caused by service disruptions of critical infrastructures, which may even take place outside the exposed areas. This paper tests a new conceptual framework for assessing criticality and provides an evidence basis for effective risk governance of critical infrastructures in urban regions. The findings are based on a multi-method approach which includes participatory activities. The overall results show that the electricity sector is the sector with the highest systemic criticality, followed by IT and emergency response. These results help to identify gaps in actors’ awareness of interdependencies and show the general criticalities of infrastructures with regard to both physical and actor-related factors. A better understanding of the given interconnection between sectors, but also of specific system elements, is an indispensable prerequisite for resilience building. Furthermore, the analysis underlines specific cooperation and communication needs between different stakeholders but also indicates the requirement for a prioritization of sectors in contingency plans and spatial planning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.