Abstract
Risk perception is a fundamental element in the definition and the adoption of preventive counter-measures. In order to develop effective information and risk communication strategies, the perception of risks and the influencing factors should be known. This paper presents preliminary results of the first survey on seismic risk perception in Italy. The research design combines a psychometric and a cultural theoretical approach. More than 5,000 on-line questionnaires have been compiled from January 23rd till July 25th, 2013. The data collected show that seismic risk perception in Italy is strongly underestimated; 86 out of 100 Italian citizens, living in the most dangerous zone (namely Zone 1), do not have a correct perception of seismic hazards. From these observations we deem that extremely urgent measures are to be taken in Italy to find effective ways to communicate seismic risk.
Keywords
This study has benefited from funding provided by the Italian Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri—Dipartimento di Protezione Civile (DPC). This paper does not necessarily represent DPC official opinion and policies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Research on risk perception has identified a range of perception patterns that relate to key characteristics of the risk itself or the context in which the risk is taken. These patterns are called semantic risk images. The semantic images allow individuals to classify various risks on the basis of a few salient characteristics. Reducing complexity by creating classes of similar phenomena is certainly a major strategy for coping with information overload and uncertainty (for further details see Renn 2008).
References
Barke RP et al (1997) Risk perceptions of men and women scientists. Soc Sci Q 78:167–176
Crescimbene M (2008) Un test sulla percezione del rischio vulcanico. http://hdl.handle.net/2122/4678
Crescimbene M et al (2013) Seismic risk perception test. EGU 2013, Poster Session. http://hdl.handle.net/2122/8704
Dake K (1991) Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J Cross Cult Psychol 22:61–82
Dake K (1992) Myths of nature: cultural and social construction of risk. J Soc Issues 48(4):21–37
Douglas M, Wildavsky AB (1983) Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley
Fischhoff B et al (1978a) Fault trees: sensitivity of assessed failure probabilities to problem representation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 4:330–344
Fischhoff B et al (1978b), How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits. Policy Sci 9:127–152
Greenberg MR, Schneider DF (1995) Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Effects Differ in Stressed vs non-stressed environments. Risk Anal 15:503–511. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00343.x
Gruppo di Lavoro MPS (2004) Redazione della mappa di pericolosità sismica prevista dall’Ordinanza PCM 3274 del 20 marzo 2003. Rapporto Conclusivo per il Dipartimento della Protezione Civile, INGV, Milano-Roma, pp 65 + 5 appendici
Gustafson PE (1998) Gender Differences in risk perception: theoretical and methodological erspectives. Risk Anal 18:805–811. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01123.x
Lave TR, Lave LB (1991) Risk Anal 11(2):255–267
Likert R (1932) Technique for the measure of attitudes. Arch Psycho 22(140):1–55
Lindell MK (1994) Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 12(3):303–326
Lindell MK, Perry RW (2000) Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of research. Environ Behav 32:590–630
Osgood CE et al (1957) The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press, Urbana
Peters E, Slovic P (1996) The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. J Appl Soc Psychol 26(16):1427–1453
Plapp T, Werner U (2006) Understanding risk perception from natural hazards: Examples from Germany by institute for finance, banking and insurance/postgraduate programme natural disasters. Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Karlsruhe
Renn O (2008) Risk governance: coping with uncertainty in a complex world. Earthscan, London, p 110
Rohrmann B (1999) Community-based fire preparedness programs: an empirical evaluation. Austral-Asian J Disaster and Trauma Studies, 1
Savage I (1993) Demographic influences on risk perceptions. Risk Anal 13:413–420. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00741.x
Siegrist M (2000a) The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Anal 20:195–203
Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000b) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20:713–719
Siegrist M et al (2000c) Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Anal 20:353–362
Sjöberg L (2000a) Factors in risk perception. Risk Anal 20:1–11
Sjöberg L (2000b) The methodology of risk perception research. Qual Quant 34:407–418
Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285
Slovic P (1992) Perceptions of risk: reflections on the psychometric paradigm. In: Krimsky S, Golding D (eds) Social theories of risk. Praeger, London, pp 117–152
Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13:675–682
Stucchi M et al (2011) Seismic Hazard Assessment (2003–2009) for the Italian building code. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101(4):1885–1911. doi:10.1785/0120100130
Szalay LB, Deese J (1978) Subjective meaning and culture : an assessment through word associations. L. Erlbaum Associates; distributed by the Halsted Press Division, Wiley, New York
Thompson M et al (1990) Cultural theory. Westview Press, Boulder
Wachinger G, Renn O (2010) Risk perception and natural hazards. CapHaz-Net WP3 Report. In: DIALOGIK non-profit Institute for Communication and Cooperative Research. Stuttgart (available via http://caphaz-net.org/outcomes-results/CapHaz-Net_WP3_Risk-Perception.pdf)
Zacchi MC, Crescimbene M (2010) Mind quakes: visualizzare la percezione del rischio sismico per la prevenzione. http://hdl.handle.net/2122/6819
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Crescimbene, M., La Longa, F., Camassi, R., Pino, N.A., Peruzza, L. (2014). What’s the Seismic Risk Perception in Italy?. In: Lollino, G., Arattano, M., Giardino, M., Oliveira, R., Peppoloni, S. (eds) Engineering Geology for Society and Territory - Volume 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09303-1_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09303-1_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09302-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09303-1
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)