Articles | Volume 22, issue 8
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2655-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2655-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
19 Aug 2022
Research article |
| 19 Aug 2022
| 19 Aug 2022
Surveying the surveyors to address risk perception and adaptive-behaviour cross-study comparability
Department of Geography, CY Cergy Paris University, 95011, Cergy-Pontoise, France
Institut Universitaire de France, 75005, Paris, France
Mariana Madruga de Brito
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for
Environmental Research, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
Alexander Fekete
Institute of Rescue Engineering and Civil Protection, TH Köln –
University of Applied Sciences, Betzdorferstr. 2, 50679 Cologne, Germany
Emeline Comby
Department of Geography, UMR 5600 EVS CNRS, Université Lumière Lyon 2, 69007, Lyon, France
Peter J. Robinson
Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental
Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1111, 1081 HV
Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Iuliana Armaş
Department of Geography, University of Bucharest, 010041, Bucharest, Romania
W. J. Wouter Botzen
Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental
Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1111, 1081 HV
Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Christian Kuhlicke
Department of Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for
Environmental Research, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
Institute of Environmental Sciences and Geography, University of
Potsdam, 14468 Potsdam-Golm, Germany
Related authors
No articles found.
Timothy Tiggeloven, Colin Raymond, Marleen C. de Ruiter, Jana Sillmann, Annegret H. Thieken, Sophie L. Buijs, Roxana Ciurean, Emma Cordier, Julia M. Crummy, Lydia Cumiskey, Kelley De Polt, Melanie Duncan, Davide M. Ferrario, Wiebke S. Jäger, Elco E. Koks, Nicole van Maanen, Heather J. Murdock, Jaroslav Mysiak, Sadhana Nirandjan, Benjamin Poschlod, Peter Priesmeier, Nivedita Sairam, Pia-Johanna Schweizer, Tristian R. Stolte, Marie-Luise Zenker, James E. Daniell, Alexander Fekete, Christian M. Geiß, Marc J. C. van den Homberg, Sirkku K. Juhola, Christian Kuhlicke, Karen Lebek, Robert Šakić Trogrlić, Stefan Schneiderbauer, Silvia Torresan, Cees J. van Westen, Judith N. Claassen, Bijan Khazai, Virginia Murray, Julius Schlumberger, and Philip J. Ward
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2771, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2771, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscience Communication (GC).
Short summary
Short summary
Natural hazards like floods, earthquakes, and landslides are often interconnected which may create bigger problems than when they occur alone. We studied expert discussions from an international conference to understand how scientists and policymakers can better prepare for these multi-hazards and use new technologies to protect its communities while contributing to dialogues about future international agreements beyond the Sendai Framework and supporting global sustainability goals.
Jan Sodoge, Taís Maria Nunes Carvalho, and Mariana Madruga de Brito
Geosci. Commun., 8, 191–196, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-8-191-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-8-191-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Thousands of geoscience abstracts are presented at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) General Assembly, but researchers often miss key insights by focusing on their own field. Using natural language processing (NLP), we help scientists find relevant research across disciplines. This approach breaks down boundaries, encouraging broader knowledge sharing and new interdisciplinary connections in the geosciences.
Louise Cavalcante, David W. Walker, Sarra Kchouk, Germano Ribeiro Neto, Taís Maria Nunes Carvalho, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Wieke Pot, Art Dewulf, and Pieter R. van Oel
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1993–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1993-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1993-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Drought affects not only water availability but also agriculture, the economy, and communities. This study explores how public policies help reduce these impacts in Ceará, Northeast Brazil. Using qualitative drought monitoring data, interviews, and policy analysis, we found that policies supporting local economies help lessen drought effects. However, most reported impacts are still related to water shortages, showing the need for broader strategies beyond water supply investment.
Vylon Ooms, Thijs Endendijk, Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts, W. J. Wouter Botzen, and Peter Robinson
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1882, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1882, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Intense rainfall events cause increasingly severe damages to urban areas globally. We use unique insurance claims data to study the effect of nature-based and other adaptation measures on damage. We compare an area in Amsterdam where measures have been implemented to a similar, adjacent area without measures using an innovative method. We find a significant reduction of damage where the adaptation measures were implemented. Urban areas can reduce rain damage by implementing adaptation measures.
Lisa Köhler, Torsten Masson, Sungju Han, and Christian Kuhlicke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1362, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1362, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how frequent flood experience relate to social norms and responsibility attribution. Using survey data from Saxony (Germany), we find that respondents with multiple flood experience are more likely to perceive social norms supporting individual protective behavior, ascribe more responsibility to public authorities and less to their community. This suggests a "we" vs. "them" polarization, potentially harming individual preparedness.
Julius Schlumberger, Tristian Stolte, Helena Margaret Garcia, Antonia Sebastian, Wiebke Jäger, Philip Ward, Marleen de Ruiter, Robert Šakić Trogrlić, Annegien Tijssen, and Mariana Madruga de Brito
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-850, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-850, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The risk flood of flood impacts is dynamic as society continuously responds to specific events or ongoing developments. We analyzed 28 studies that assess such dynamics of vulnerability. Most research uses surveys and basic statistics data, while integrated, flexible models are seldom used. The studies struggle to link specific events or developments to the observed changes. Our findings highlight needs and possible directions towards a better assessment of vulnerability dynamics.
Kushagra Pandey, Jens A. de Bruijn, Hans de Moel, W. J. Wouter Botzen, and Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4409–4429, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-4409-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-4409-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
As sea levels rise, coastal areas will experience more frequent flooding, and salt water will start seeping into the soil, which is a serious issue for farmers who rely on good soil quality for their crops. Here, we studied coastal Mozambique to understand the risks from sea level rise and flooding by looking at how salt intrusion affects farming and how floods damage buildings. We find that 15 %–21 % of coastal households will adapt and 13 %–20 % will migrate to inland areas in the future.
Samuel Jonson Sutanto, Matthijs Janssen, Mariana Madruga de Brito, and Maria del Pozo Garcia
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3703–3721, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3703-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3703-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A conventional flood risk assessment only evaluates flood hazard in isolation without considering wildfires. This study, therefore, evaluates the effect of wildfires on flood risk, considering both current and future conditions for the Ebro River basin in Spain. Results show that extreme climate change increases the risk of flooding, especially when considering the effect of wildfires, highlighting the importance of adopting a multi-hazard risk management approach.
Riccardo Biella, Anastasiya Shyrokaya, Ilias Pechlivanidis, Daniela Cid, Maria Carmen Llasat, Marthe Wens, Marleen Lam, Elin Stenfors, Samuel Sutanto, Elena Ridolfi, Serena Ceola, Pedro Alencar, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Monica Ionita, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Scott J. McGrane, Benedetta Moccia, Viorica Nagavciuc, Fabio Russo, Svitlana Krakovska, Andrijana Todorovic, Faranak Tootoonchi, Patricia Trambauer, Raffaele Vignola, and Claudia Teutschbein
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2073, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2073, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This research by the Drought in the Anthropocene (DitA) network highlights the crucial role of forecasting systems and Drought Management Plans in European drought risk management. Based on a survey of water managers during the 2022 European drought, it underscores the impact of preparedness on response and the evolution of drought management strategies across the continent. The study concludes with a plea for a European Drought Directive.
Viet Dung Nguyen, Jeroen Aerts, Max Tesselaar, Wouter Botzen, Heidi Kreibich, Lorenzo Alfieri, and Bruno Merz
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2923–2937, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2923-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2923-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our study explored how seasonal flood forecasts could enhance insurance premium accuracy. Insurers traditionally rely on historical data, yet climate fluctuations influence flood risk. We employed a method that predicts seasonal floods to adjust premiums accordingly. Our findings showed significant year-to-year variations in flood risk and premiums, underscoring the importance of adaptability. Despite limitations, this research aids insurers in preparing for evolving risks.
Andra-Cosmina Albulescu and Iuliana Armaș
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2895–2922, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2895-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2895-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study delves into the dynamics of vulnerability within a multi-hazard context, proposing an enhanced impact-chain-based framework that analyses the augmentation of vulnerability. The case study refers to the flood events and the COVID-19 pandemic that affected Romania (2020–2021). The impact chain shows that (1) the unforeseen implications of impacts, (2) the wrongful action of adaptation options, and (3) inaction can form the basis for increased vulnerability.
Riccardo Biella, Ansastasiya Shyrokaya, Monica Ionita, Raffaele Vignola, Samuel Sutanto, Andrijana Todorovic, Claudia Teutschbein, Daniela Cid, Maria Carmen Llasat, Pedro Alencar, Alessia Matanó, Elena Ridolfi, Benedetta Moccia, Ilias Pechlivanidis, Anne van Loon, Doris Wendt, Elin Stenfors, Fabio Russo, Jean-Philippe Vidal, Lucy Barker, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Marleen Lam, Monika Bláhová, Patricia Trambauer, Raed Hamed, Scott J. McGrane, Serena Ceola, Sigrid Jørgensen Bakke, Svitlana Krakovska, Viorica Nagavciuc, Faranak Tootoonchi, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Sandra Hauswirth, Shreedhar Maskey, Svitlana Zubkovych, Marthe Wens, and Lena Merete Tallaksen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2069, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2069, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This research by the Drought in the Anthropocene (DitA) network highlights gaps in European drought management exposed by the 2022 drought and proposes a new direction. Using a Europe-wide survey of water managers, we examine four areas: increasing drought risk, impacts, drought management strategies, and their evolution. Despite growing risks, management remains fragmented and short-term. However, signs of improvement suggest readiness for change. We advocate for a European Drought Directive.
Jan Sodoge, Christian Kuhlicke, Miguel D. Mahecha, and Mariana Madruga de Brito
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1757–1777, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1757-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1757-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We delved into the socio-economic impacts of the 2018–2022 drought in Germany. We derived a dataset covering the impacts of droughts in Germany between 2000 and 2022 on sectors such as agriculture and forestry based on newspaper articles. Notably, our study illustrated that the longer drought had a wider reach and more varied effects. We show that dealing with longer droughts requires different plans compared to shorter ones, and it is crucial to be ready for the challenges they bring.
Laurine A. de Wolf, Peter J. Robinson, W. J. Wouter Botzen, Toon Haer, Jantsje M. Mol, and Jeffrey Czajkowski
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1303–1318, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1303-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1303-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
An understanding of flood risk perceptions may aid in improving flood risk communication. We conducted a survey among 871 coastal residents in Florida who were threatened to be flooded by Hurricane Dorian. Part of the original sample was resurveyed after Dorian failed to make landfall to investigate changes in risk perception. We find a strong influence of previous flood experience and social norms on flood risk perceptions. Furthermore, flood risk perceptions declined after the near-miss event.
Lisa Köhler, Torsten Masson, Sabrina Köhler, and Christian Kuhlicke
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2787–2806, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2787-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2787-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We analyzed the impact of flood experience on adaptive behavior and self-reported resilience. The outcomes draw a paradoxical picture: the most experienced people are the most adapted but the least resilient. We find evidence for non-linear relationships between the number of floods experienced and resilience. We contribute to existing knowledge by focusing specifically on the number of floods experienced and extending the rare scientific literature on the influence of experience on resilience.
Vincent Schippers and Wouter Botzen
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 179–204, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-179-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-179-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Researchers studying economic impacts of natural disasters increasingly use night light as a proxy for local economic activity, when socioeconomic data are unavailable. But often it is unclear what changes in light intensity represent in the context of disasters. We study this in detail for Hurricane Katrina and find a strong correlation with building damage and changes in population and employment. We conclude that night light data are useful to study local impacts of natural disasters.
Franciele Maria Vanelli, Masato Kobiyama, and Mariana Madruga de Brito
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2301–2317, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2301-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2301-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We conducted a systematic literature review of socio-hydrological studies applied to natural hazards and disaster research. Results indicate that there is a wide range of understanding of what
socialmeans in socio-hydrology, and monodisciplinary studies prevail. We expect to encourage socio-hydrologists to investigate different disasters using a more integrative approach that combines natural and social sciences tools by involving stakeholders and broadening the use of mixed methods.
Luana Lavagnoli Moreira, Mariana Madruga de Brito, and Masato Kobiyama
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1513–1530, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1513-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1513-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The review of flood vulnerability indices revealed that (1) temporal dynamic aspects were often disregarded, (2) coping and adaptive capacity indicators were frequently ignored, as obtaining these data demand time and effort, and (3) most studies neither applied sensitivity (90.5 %) or uncertainty analyses (96.8 %) nor validated the results (86.3 %). The study highlights the importance of addressing these gaps to produce scientifically rigorous and comparable research.
Cited articles
Adelekan, I. O. and Asiyanbi, A. P.: Flood risk perception in flood-affected communities in Lagos, Nigeria, Natural
Hazards, 80, 445–469, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1977-2, 2016.
Armaş, I.: Social vulnerability and seismic risk perception. Case study:
the historic center of the Bucharest Municipality, Nat. Hazards, 47,
397–410, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9229-3, 2008.
Armaş, I., Ionescu, R., and Posner, C. N.: Flood risk perception along the
Lower Danube river, Romania, Nat. Hazards, 79, 1913–1931, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1939-8, 2015.
Baker, E. J.: Hurricane evacuation behavior, Int. J. Mass Emerg. Disasters,
9, 287–310, 1991.
Bamberg, S., Masson, T., Brewitt, K., and Nemetschek, N.: Threat, coping and
flood prevention – A meta-analysis, J. Environ. Psychol., 54, 116–126,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.08.001, 2017.
Begg, C., Ueberham, M., Masson, T., and Kuhlicke, C.: Interactions between
citizen responsibilization, flood experience and household resilience:
insights from the 2013 flood in Germany, Int. J. Water Resour. D., 33,
591–608, https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2016.1200961, 2017.
Berrang-Ford, L., Siders, A. R., Lesnikowski, A., Fischer, A. P., Callaghan,
M. W., et al.: A systematic global stocktake of evidence on human adaptation to
climate change, Nat. Clim. Chang., 11, 989–1000, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01170-y, 2021.
Bhattacherjee, A.: Social science research: principles, methods, and
practices, Univ. South Florida, Tampa, Florida, 2012.
Boholm, A.: Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years
of research, J. Risk Res., 1, 135–163, https://doi.org/10.1080/136698798377231, 1998.
Botzen, W. J. W. and Van Den Bergh, J. C.: Monetary valuation of insurance against flood risk under climate change,
Int. Econ. Rev., 53, 1005–1026, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2012.00709.x, 2012.
Botzen, W. J. W., Aerts, J. C. J. H., and van den Bergh, J. C. J. M.: Dependence of flood risk perceptions on socio-economic and objective risk factors, Water Resour. Res., 45, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007743, 2009.
Botzen, W. J. W., Kunreuther, H. C., and Michel-Kerjan, E. O.: Divergence between individual perceptions and objective indicators of tail risks, Judgm. Decis. Mak., 10, 365–385, http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15415/jdm15415.pdf (last access: 17 August 2022), 2015.
Bradford, R. A., O'Sullivan, J. J., van der Craats, I. M., Krywkow, J., Rotko, P., Aaltonen, J., Bonaiuto, M., De Dominicis, S., Waylen, K., and Schelfaut, K.: Risk perception – issues for flood management in Europe, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 2299–2309, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-2299-2012, 2012.
Bubeck, P., Botzen, W. J. W., and Aerts, J. C. J. H.: A Review of Risk
Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior, Risk
Anal., 32, 1481–1495,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01783.x, 2012.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., and Olsen, J. P.: A Garbage Can Model of
Organizational Choice, Admin. Sci. Quart., 17, 1,
https://doi.org/10.2307/2392088, 1972.
de Brito, M. M., Evers, M., and Almoradie, A. D. S.: Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 373–390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-373-2018, 2018.
De Dominicis, S., Fornara, F., Cancellieri, U. G., Twigger-Ross, C., and Bonaiuto, M.: We are at risk, and so what? Place attachment, environmental risk perceptions and preventive coping behaviours, J. Environ. Psychol., 43, 66–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.05.010, 2015.
Demuth, J. L.: Explicating Experience: Development of a Valid Scale of Past
Hazard Experience for Tornadoes: Explicating Experience, Risk Anal., 38,
1921–1943, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12983, 2018.
Floyd, D. L., Prentice-Dunn, S., and Rogers, R. W.: A Meta-Analysis of
Research on Protection Motivation Theory, J. Appl. Soc. Pyschol., 30,
407–429, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02323.x, 2000.
Gierlach, E., Belsher, B. E., and Beutler, L. E.: Cross-Cultural Differences
in Risk Perceptions of Disasters, Risk Anal., 30, 1539–1549,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01451.x, 2010.
Grothmann, T. and Reusswig, F.: People at risk of flooding: why some residents take precautionary action while others do not, Natural Hazards, 38, 101–120, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-005-8604-6, 2006.
Hartmann, T. and Driessen, P. J.: The Flood Risk Management Plan: Towards spatial water governance,
J. Flood Risk Manage., 10, 145–154, https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12077, 2017.
Höppner, C., Whittle, R., Bründl, M., and Buchecker, M.: Linking
social capacities and risk communication in Europe: a gap between theory and
practice?, Nat. Hazards, 64, 1753–1778, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0356-5, 2012.
Huang, S.-K., Lindell, M. K., and Prater, C. S.: Who Leaves and Who Stays? A
Review and Statistical Meta-Analysis of Hurricane Evacuation Studies,
Environ. Behav., 48, 991–1029, https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916515578485,
2016.
Kates, R. W.: Perceptual regions and regional perception in flood plain
management, Pap. Reg. Sci. Assoc., 11, 215–227,
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01943205, 1963.
Kellens, W., Terpstra, T., and De Maeyer, P.: Perception and Communication
of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research, Risk Anal., 33,
24–49, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01844.x, 2013.
Kreibich, H., Müller, M., Schröter, K., and Thieken, A. H.: New insights into flood warning reception and emergency response by affected parties, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 2075–2092, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-2075-2017, 2017.
Kuhlicke, C., Scolobig, A., Tapsell, S., Steinführer, A., and De Marchi, B.: Contextualizing social vulnerability: findings from case studies across Europe, Natural Hazards, 58, 789–810, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9751-6, 2011.
Kuhlicke, C., Seebauer, S., Hudson, P., Begg, C., Bubeck, P., Dittmer, C.,
Grothmann, T., Heidenreich, A., Kreibich, H., Lorenz, D. F., Masson, T.,
Reiter, J., Thaler, T., Thieken, A. H., and Bamberg, S.: The behavioral turn
in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications, W.
Water, 7, e1418, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1418, 2020.
Lechowska, E.: What determines flood risk perception? A review of factors of
flood risk perception and relations between its basic elements, Nat.
Hazards, 94, 1341–1366, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3480-z, 2018.
Lindell, M. K.: Comment on nhess-2021-365, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.,
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2021-365-RC1, 2022.
Lindell, M. K. and Hwang, S. N.: Households' perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment, Risk Anal., 28, 539–556, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01032.x, 2008.
Lindell, M. K. and Perry, R. W.: Household Adjustment to Earthquake Hazard:
A Review of Research, Environ. Behav., 32, 461–501,
https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972621, 2000.
Lindell, M. K. and Perry, R. W.: The Protective Action Decision Model:
Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence: The Protective Action
Decision Model, Risk Anal., 32, 616–632,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x, 2012.
Lindell, M. K. and Prater, C. S.: Household Adoption of Seismic Hazard
Adjustments: A Comparison of Residents in Two States, Int. J. Mass Emerg.
Disasters, 18, 317–338, 2000.
Mol, J. M., Botzen, W. J. W., Blasch, J. E., and de Moel, H.: Insights into
Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta, Risk
Anal., 40, 1450–1468, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13479,
2020.
Moors, A. and De Houwer, J.: What is automaticity? An analysis of its
component features and their interrelations, in: Automatic Processes in
Social Thinking and Behavior, Psychology Press, 11–50, 2007.
Moreira, L. L., de Brito, M. M., and Kobiyama, M.: Review article: A systematic review and future prospects of flood vulnerability indices, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1513–1530, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1513-2021, 2021.
O'Neill, E., Brereton, F., Shahumyan, H., and Clinch, J. P.: The Impact of
Perceived Flood Exposure on Flood-Risk Perception: The Role of Distance,
Risk Anal., 36, 2158–2186, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12597,
2016.
Orum, A. M.: Case Study: Logic, in: International Encyclopedia of the Social
& Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, 202–207,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.44002-X, 2015.
Raška, P.: Flood risk perception in Central-Eastern European members
states of the EU: a review, Nat. Hazards, 79, 2163–2179, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1929-x, 2015.
Renn, O. and Rohrmann, B.: Cross-Cultural Risk Perception: a Survey of
Empirical Studies, Springer US, Boston, MA, 2000.
Robinson, P. J. and Botzen, W. J. W.: Economic Experiments, Hypothetical
Surveys and Market Data Studies of Insurance Demand Against
Low-Probability/High-Impact Risks: A Systematic Review of Designs,
Theoretical Insights and Determinants of Demand, J. Econ. Surv., 33,
1493–1530, https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12332, 2019.
Rosenthal, R.: The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results, Psychol. Bull.,
86, 638–641, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638, 1979.
Rufat, S.: Towards a Social and Spatial Risk Perception Framework, Cybergeo, 725,
https://doi.org/10.4000/cybergeo.27010, 2015.
Rufat, S. and Botzen, W. J. W.: Drivers and dimensions of flood risk
perceptions: Revealing an implicit selection bias and lessons for
communication policies, Global Environ. Chang., 73, 102465,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102465, 2022.
Rufat, S. and Fekete, A.: Conclusions of the first European Conference on Risk Perception,
Behaviour, Management and Response, CY Cergy Paris University, halshs-02486584, https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02486584/document (last access: 15 November 2021), 2019.
Rufat, S., Tate, E., Burton, C. G., and Maroof, A. S.: Social vulnerability
to floods: Review of case studies and implications for measurement, Int. J.
Disast. Risk Re., 14, 470–486, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.09.013, 2015.
Rufat, S., Fekete, A., Armaş, I., Hartmann, T., Kuhlicke, C., Prior, T.,
Thaler, T., and Wisner, B.: Swimming alone? Why linking flood risk
perception and behavior requires more than “it's the individual, stupid”,
W. Water, 7, e1462, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1462, 2020.
Rufat, S., Armaş, I., Botzen, W., Comby, E., de Brito, M., Fekete, A.,
Kuhlicke, C., and Robinson, P.: Risk Perception & Behaviour Survey of
Surveyors. Risk-SoS 2020 Preliminary results,
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03228369 (last access: 15 November 2021), 2021.
Runhardt, R. W.: Causal Comparability, Causal Generalizations, and Epistemic
Homogeneity, Philos. Soc. Sci., 47, 183–208,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393116681079, 2017.
Ruzzene, A.: Drawing Lessons from Case Studies by Enhancing Comparability,
Philos. Soc. Sci., 42, 99–120, https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393111426683,
2012.
Santos-Reyes, J., Gouzeva, T., and Santos-Reyes, G.: Earthquake risk
perception and communication: A review of empirical research, Disaster Adv., 7, 77–87, 2014.
Scolobig, A., Prior, T., Schröter, D., Jörin, J., and Patt, A.:
Towards people-centred approaches for effective disaster risk management:
Balancing rhetoric with reality, Int. J. Disast. Risk Re., 12, 202–212,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.01.006, 2015.
Shrout, P. E. and Rodgers, J. L.: Psychology, Science, and Knowledge
Construction: Broadening Perspectives from the Replication Crisis, Annu.
Rev. Psychol., 69, 487–510,
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845, 2018.
Siegrist, M.: Trust and Risk Perception: A Critical Review of the
Literature, Risk Anal., 41, 480–490, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13325, 2021.
Siegrist, M. and Árvai, J.: Risk perception: Reflections on 40 years of research, Risk Anal., 40, 2191–2206, https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13599, 2020.
Slavikova, L.: Effects of government flood expenditures: The problem of crowding-out, J. Flood Risk Manage., 11, 95–104, https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12265, 2018.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D.: Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and
Biases, Science, 185, 1124–1131, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124, 1974.
UNDRR: Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, United
Nations, Geneva, 2015.
UNDRR: Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction 2019, United
Nations, Geneva, 2019.
van Valkengoed, A. M. and Steg, L.: Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 158–163, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0371-y, 2019.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., and Kuhlicke, C.: The Risk Perception
Paradox – Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards,
Risk Anal., 33, 1049–1065, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x, 2013.
Wilkinson, I.: Social Theories of Risk Perception: At Once Indispensable and
Insufficient, Current Sociol., 49, 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392101049001002, 2001.
Short summary
It remains unclear why people fail to act adaptively to reduce future losses, even when there is ever-richer information available. To improve the ability of researchers to build cumulative knowledge, we conducted an international survey – the Risk Perception and Behaviour Survey of Surveyors (Risk-SoS). We find that most studies are exploratory and often overlook theoretical efforts that would enable the accumulation of evidence. We offer several recommendations for future studies.
It remains unclear why people fail to act adaptively to reduce future losses, even when there is...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint