Skip to main content
Log in

Why are flood and landslide victims less willing to take mitigation measures than the public?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Almost annually, natural hazards such as floods and landslides cause a great deal of financial loss and human suffering in Taiwan. In order to gain a better understanding of disaster preparedness, this paper examines several factors in relation to hazard mitigation behavior: social economic status (education, income), psychological vulnerability (sense of powerless and helpless), risk perception (perceived impact and control) and social trust. The statistical analysis reported here is based on the “2004 National Risk Perception Survey of Floods and Landslides in Taiwan”. The main findings include: (1) in comparison with general public, victims are less willing to adopt risk mitigation measures than the public, even though they perceive larger impacts, worry more about the hazard, and pay more attention to hazard information; (2) trust, risk perception and social economic status are positive predictors for mitigation intentions, whereas psychological vulnerability is a negative predictor; and (3) psychological variables are stronger predictors for mitigation intentions than that of socio-economic variables. In light of these findings, the policy implications and intervention strategy are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The correlation coefficients between these seven predictors are low. They are below 0.32 for flood and 0.30 for landslide.

  2. In an analysis not reported here, we also include age and gender in the regression model. The results were similar to the present findings.

References

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50:179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I, Wisner B (1994) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, and disasters. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q 84:242–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards ML (1993) Social location and self-protective behavior: implications for earthquake preparedness. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 11:293–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S, Read S, Combs B (1978) How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sci 9:127–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell MK, Alesch D, Bolton PA, Greene MR, Larson LA, Lopes R, May PJ, Mulilis J-P, Nathe S, Nigg JM, Palm R, Pate P, Perry RW, Pine J, Tubbesing SK, Whitney DJ (1997) Adoption and implementation of hazard adjustments. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters Spl Issue 15:327–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Mileti DS (1999) Disasters by design: a reassessment of natural hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC

  • National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (2006) The executive report of the survey of social-economic impacts and risk perception of floods and landslides. ISBN 986-00-5244-1

  • Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13:675–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1997) Trust, emotion, sex, politics and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. In: Bazerman M, Messick D, Tenbrunsel A, Wade-Benzoni K (eds) Environment ethics and behavior. New Lexington Press, San Francisco, pp 277–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Starr C (1985) Risk management, assessment, and acceptability. Risk Anal 5:97–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuyeu Lin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lin, S., Shaw, D. & Ho, MC. Why are flood and landslide victims less willing to take mitigation measures than the public?. Nat Hazards 44, 305–314 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-007-9136-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-007-9136-z

Keywords

Navigation