No abstract

Abstract. Feedback via simulation tools is likely to help people improve their decision-making against natural disasters. However, little is known on how differing strengths of experiential feedback and feedback's availability in simulation tools influence people's decisions against landslides. We tested the influence of differing strengths of experiential feedback and feedback's availability on people's decisions against landslides in Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, India. Experiential feedback (high or low) and feedback's availability (present or absent) were varied across four between-subject conditions in a tool called the Interactive Landslide Simulation (ILS): high damage with feedback present, high damage with feedback absent, low damage with feedback present, and low damage with feedback absent. In high-damage conditions, the probabilities of damages to life and property due to landslides were 10 times higher than those in the low-damage conditions. In feedback-present conditions, experiential feedback was provided in numeric, text, and graphical formats in ILS. In feedback-absent conditions, the probabilities of damages were described; however, there was no experiential feedback present. Investments were greater in conditions where experiential feedback was present and damages were high compared to conditions where experiential feedback was absent and damages were low. Furthermore, only high-damage feedback produced learning in ILS. Simulation tools like ILS seem appropriate for landslide risk communication and for performing what-if analyses.

No abstract

Landslide experts have developed very detailed landslide hazard maps for different parts of Himalayas in India. These maps indicate the types of damage possible and the probabilities of adverse events. Six categories of risk severity are defined on the maps, ranging from severe risk to very low risk. Based on the existing maps, we selected respondents for a survey, some from areas high in risk and others from low-risk regions. Respondents answered several questions related to landslide risk perception and preparedness. Survey results showed a lack of awareness about the scientific causes of landslides among Mandi residents. Most of the respondents were of the belief that they lived at a safe place. Survey results suggested that many inhabitants did not know that landslide hazard maps existed for their region and most of them were not able to understand them. People overestimated the risks associated with landslides. Consequently, some people were more worried of landslides than was justified by the facts. Another important finding was that since catastrophic landslides are rare events, most of the people were risk averse. These people did not show prevention behaviour, and they were not well prepared for an adverse event. Furthermore, results suggest that respondents' experiences with landslides were positively related to their perceptions of landslide risk. Thus, findings of the present study comply with the concept of availability heuristic.

No abstract