Risk interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards

Eiser, J. Richard; Bostrom, Ann; Burton, Ian; Johnston, David; McClure, John; Paton, Douglas; Pligt, J. van der; White, Mathew P.

doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.002

Cited by 437 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

131

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…responsibility and trust. Apart from experience and emotions, the perceived responsibility of authorities was also found to influence individual risk preparedness in several studies (Botzen et al, 2009a;O'Sullivan et al, 2012;Eiser et al, 2012) although Terpstra et al (2006) found no such correlation. Their results indicate that the influence of perceived responsibility on preparedness is a matter of citizens' trust in their government, and the degree to which citizens trust governments varies according to political and cultural circumstances.…”

Section: Relevant Findings and Open Research Questions On Risk Preparmentioning

confidence: 99%

Raising risk preparedness by flood risk communication

Maidl

Buchecker

2015

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. During the last decade, most European countries have produced hazard maps of natural hazards, but little is known about how to communicate these maps most efficiently to the public. In October 2011, Zurich's local authorities informed owners of buildings located in the urban flood hazard zone about potential flood damage, the probability of flood events and protection measures. The campaign was based on the assumptions that informing citizens increases their risk awareness and that citizens who are aware of risks are more likely to undertake actions to protect themselves and their property.This study is intended as a contribution to better understand the factors that influence flood risk preparedness, with a special focus on the effects of such a one-way risk communication strategy. We conducted a standardized mail survey of 1500 property owners in the hazard zones in Zurich (response rate main survey: 34 %). The questionnaire included items to measure respondents' risk awareness, risk preparedness, flood experience, information-seeking behaviour, knowledge about flood risk, evaluation of the information material, risk acceptance, attachment to the property and trust in local authorities. Data about the type of property and sociodemographic variables were also collected.Multivariate data analysis revealed that the average level of risk awareness and preparedness was low, but the results confirmed that the campaign had a statistically significant effect on the level of preparedness. The main influencing factors on the intention to prepare for a flood were the extent to which respondents evaluated the information material positively as well as their risk awareness. Respondents who had never taken any previous interest in floods were less likely to read the material. For future campaigns, we therefore recommend repeated communication that is tailored to the information needs of the target population.

show abstract

Section: Relevant Findings and Open Research Questions On Risk Preparmentioning

confidence: 99%

Raising risk preparedness by flood risk communication

Maidl

Buchecker

2015

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3). However, defining cost and benefit functions of people is difficult as human decision-making is often a balance of multiple, conflicting objectives, and the attitude towards risk and uncertainty can strongly vary across human societies depending on political and socio-economic conditions as well as cultural values (Eiser et al, 2012;Wachinger et al, 2012). Moreover, humans have powerful tools to shape floodplain dynamics that go beyond the adaptation strategies of natural ecosystems, and the development of these tools themselves can be boosted by (often unpredictable) technological revolutions (Taleb, 2007).…”

Section: Towards a Transdisciplinary Understanding Of Floodplainsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards understanding the dynamic behaviour of floodplains as human-water systems

Baldassarre

Kooy

Kemerink

et al. 2013

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

212

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper offers a conceptual approach to explore the complex dynamics of floodplains as fully coupled human-water systems. A number of hydrologists have recently investigated the impact of human activities (such as flood control measures, land-use changes, and settlement patterns) on the frequency and severity of floods. Meanwhile, social scientists have shown how interactions between society and waters in deltas and floodplain areas, including the frequency and severity of floods, have an impact on the ways in which social relations unfold (in terms of governance processes, policies, and institutions) and societies are organised (spatially, politically, and socially). However, we argue that the interactions and associated feedback mechanisms between hydrological and social processes remain largely unexplored and poorly understood. Thus, there is a need to better understand how the institutions and governance processes interact with hydrological processes in deltas and floodplains to influence the frequency and severity of floods, while (in turn) hydrological processes co-constitute the social realm and make a difference for how social relations unfold to shape governance processes and institutions. Our research goal, therefore, is not in identifying one or the other side of the cycle (hydrological or social), but in explaining the relationship between them: how, when, where, and why they interact, and to what result for both social relations and hydrological processes? We argue that long time series of hydrological and social data, along with remote sensing data, can be used to observe floodplain dynamics from unconventional approaches, and understand the complex interactions between water and human systems taking place in floodplain areas, across scales and levels of human impacts, and within different hydro-climatic conditions, socio-cultural settings, and modes of governance.

show abstract

“…Emerging risks from the potential impacts of climate change arise not only from how the future is described, but also from the uncertainty, actual or perceived, surrounding that description (Eiser et al 2012;Willows and Connell 2003). Evidence gathered through decision sciences demonstrates that 'good' scientific and technical information alone may be insufficient to assure 'better' decisions (Pidgeon and Fischhoff 2011;Kirchhoff et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence gathered through decision sciences demonstrates that 'good' scientific and technical information alone may be insufficient to assure 'better' decisions (Pidgeon and Fischhoff 2011;Kirchhoff et al 2013). Eiser et al (2012) argue that risk-related decision-making under uncertainty is no longer adequately described by traditional 'rational choice' models and that attention needs to be paid to the way personal interpretations of risk are shaped by beliefs, values, and societal dynamics. McNie (2007) highlights that concentrated efforts in increasing the supply of scientific information may well not be producing the sorts of information decisionmakers see as relevant and useful.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are European decision-makers preparing for high-end climate change?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the Paris Agreement target of holding global temperature increases 1.5 to 2°C above pre-industrial levels, high-end climate change (HECC) scenarios going beyond 4°C are becoming increasingly plausible. HECC may imply increasing climate variability and extremes as well as the triggering of tipping points, posing further difficulties for adaptation. This paper compares the outcomes of four concurrent European case studies (EU, Hungary, Portugal, and Scotland) that explore the individual and institutional conditions, and the information used to underpin adaptation-related decision-making in the context of HECC. The focus is on (i) whether HECC scenarios are used in current adaptation-related decision-making processes; (ii) the role of uncertainty and how climate and non-climate information is used (or not) in these processes; and (iii) the information types (including socio-economic drivers) commonly used and their limitations in relation to HECC scenarios. Decision-makers perceive HECC as having a low probability or distant occurrence and do not routinely account for HECC scenarios within existing climate actions. Decision-makers also perceive non-climate drivers as at least as important, in many cases more important, than climate change alone. Whilst more information about the implications of particular sectoral and cross-sectoral impacts is needed, climate change uncertainty is not a significant barrier to decision-making. Further understanding of individual and institutional challenges brought about by the 'squeeze' between adapting to HECC scenarios or to lower levels of temperature change (as those agreed in Paris) is essential to better contextualise the use of climate change information.

show abstract

Risk interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards

Cited by 437 publications

References 58 publications

Raising risk preparedness by flood risk communication

Raising risk preparedness by flood risk communication

Towards understanding the dynamic behaviour of floodplains as human-water systems

Are European decision-makers preparing for high-end climate change?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About