Conducting an adaptive evaluation framework of importance and performance for community-based earthquake disaster management

Abstract

The frequency and intensity of natural disasters have been increasing in recent decades; especially earthquakes are one of the causes of major natural disasters. Improving community adaptive response to disasters based on community capacity has gradually become an effective means of coping with disaster risks, as well as improving residents' well-being and community participation in disaster planning and management. We integrate community resilience and disaster management to establish an evaluation framework for community-based earthquake disaster management (CEDM) based on community perspectives under importance performance analysis method, and identify the factors affecting community adaptive behavior. Features that affect the differentiation of community residents' adaptive behavior in CEDM program are classified into risk perception, learning earthquake knowledge, the ability on earthquake prevention, and creating a platform on CEDM. The results identify that the CEDM has to integrate the higher community education plan, the stronger flexible to disaster preparedness, the higher the residents' awareness of disaster prevention, the stronger the ability to adapt to disasters; the higher the ability of the government and non-profit organizations to cooperate with the community to deal with disasters, and the stronger the community's ability to manage disasters. These findings provide valuable insights into the construction of CEDM systems and related policymaking.

Integrating Locals’ Importance–Performance Perception of Community Resilience into Sustainable Indigenous Tourism Management

“…IPA is a useful methodology for evaluating satisfaction and is widely used in empirical research in many fields, such as ecosystem services [73][74][75], sustainable forest management [76], human-wildlife conflict management [77,78], adaptive waste management [79,80], and earthquake disaster management [59]. It is an ideal tool for measuring the quality of products/services because of its easy-to-use and easy-to-understand presentation of data graphics [81].…”

“…Finally, quadrant IV, "Possible overkill", refers to low importance but high performance (opportunities). The rated indicators imply resources may have been overinvested [34,59,[76][77][78][79][80] (Figure 2). [34] and Oh [61]).…”

“…Community resources, referred to as community capitals, are strategically invested in collective endeavors to focus on the community objectives and improve the quality of life [56,57] in the community [58]. Lin and Lee [59] used the above resilience concept to research the adaptive behavior of earthquake disaster management affecting community residents. They evaluated risk perception, learned earthquake knowledge, learned the ability to prevent earthquakes, and created a platform for community earthquake disaster management.…”

The Risk-Informed Asset-Centric (RIACT) Urban Resilience Enhancement Process: An Outline and Pilot-Case Demonstrator for Earthquake Risk Mitigation in Portuguese Municipalities

“…Furthering the discussion on infrastructure resilience, Lin and Lee (2022) proposed an adaptive evaluation framework to assess the importance and performance of communitybased earthquake disaster management [78]. Their framework is aimed at improving the adaptability and efficacy of earthquake disaster management by prioritizing communitybased approaches.…”

Building a Community’s Adaptive Capacity for Post-Mining Plans Based on Important Performance Analysis: Case Study from Indonesia

“…This indicates that reallocating resources to this quadrant performs well, but its significance is limited cating the potential for wasting limited resources wh allocated elsewhere [45]. Each quadrant of the stand strategy to identify areas of concern and actions to be IPA were initially developed for marketing purposes but are now used in a variety of fields-for example, tourism [45,47], health [46], public administration [48], education [49], waste management [50], disaster management [51], forest management [52], and national park management [53]. This study will also look for the level of importance and performance based on local people's perspectives on post-mining conditions.…”