Households’ Evacuation Decisions in Response to the 2011 Flood in Thailand

Abstract

This study aims at clarifying households’ responses to the flood in Thailand. The result of this study helps fill the gap in literature about the factor affecting a household’s decision to evacuate in response to the flood, as such a decision varies with the type of natural disaster. The result of the study confirms that more vulnerable people are less likely to evacuate. However, they are more likely to evacuate, if at least one of their household members has reduced mobility. People in flood-prone areas exhibited moral hazards. Furthermore, people with relatively secured employment statuses are more likely to stay in the flood-prone area, to minimize their losses from the flood. If households with management-level employees received real-time and accurate updates about the flood, the decision to evacuate would be freely decided by such households, which can minimize their losses. Similarly, real-time and accurate data about potential damages and losses can reduce moral hazards. Thus, it is necessary for national and local governments to understand area-specific characteristics of people and linkages between societal vulnerability and economic resilience. The study’s implications highlight the importance of developing disaster management strategies in an integrated area-based approach.

The Association between Socioeconomic Status and Race/Ethnicity with Home Evacuation of Lower Manhattan Residents following the 9/11/2001 World Trade Center Disaster

“…The Protection Action Decision Model was developed as a theoretical framework for home evacuation following “natural” disasters, including volcano eruptions, wildland fires, hurricanes, and other weather-related incidents [ 4 ]. The decision to evacuate or not is a complex multi-step process, involving prior experience with relief efforts, risk perception [ 5 ], fear of theft of household goods [ 6 ], social cues of perceiving others preparing to evacuate, levels of community cooperation [ 7 ], and weighing warnings and evacuation orders against competing demands. Determining whether evacuating or sheltering in place is the best option largely depends on one’s perception of safety.…”

Migration of older persons seeking care in Thailand

“…Migration for care at an older age is one of the life options for coping with care needs. However, older persons migrate less than younger adults for a variety of age‐related reasons, for example, the physical difficulty of moving, strong attachments to the local community, or to protect their home (Zaiceva, 2014; Bhula‐or et al., 2020; HelpAge International & Samuel Hall, 2017). Thereby, major discussions on migration and care needs are primarily deliberated with respect to the effect of the migration of working‐age adults on the left‐behind elderly (HelpAge International & Samuel Hall, 2017; Knodel et al., 2011; Thapa et al., 2018; Yi et al., 2019; Zimmer & Knodel, 2009).…”