Correlates of flood hazard adjustment adoption in four coastal communities
Introduction
Floods pose a significant threat to most US communities, with floods striking 99% of all counties between 1996 and 2019 and producing the most damage from any natural hazard [1,2]. The flood hazard literature identifies a wide range of hazard adjustments—actions taken intentionally or unintentionally to reduce the risks from extreme events in the natural environment [3]. Communities can implement a variety of pre-impact flood hazard adjustments that include hazard mitigation, emergency response preparedness, and disaster recovery preparedness [4]. In practice, however, community hazard mitigation options such as community protection works, land use regulations, and building codes are limited because of the complex institutional and decision-making frameworks that are required for their implementation [5]. Consequently, household risk reduction measures need to play a significant role in flood hazard management [6,[7], [8]]). This makes it imperative that local officials better understand the process of household flood hazard adjustment adoption.
The aim of this study is to continue the search for variables that predict the adoption of household flood hazard adjustments. Specifically, we investigate the influence of four risk perception scales (expected personal consequences, affective response, hazard intrusive thoughts, and hazard intrusive discussions) along with six types of contextual variables (flood information sources, perceived personal protection responsibility, hazard experience, hazard proximity, community CRS rating, and demographic characteristics) on adoption of three types of flood hazard adjustments (emergency preparedness, structural mitigation, and nonstructural mitigation). Although previous research has studied many of these predictors of flood hazard adjustment adoption, the present study examines more comprehensive operationalizations of these variables. For example, as noted below, risk perception is often defined in terms of expected personal consequences, but the addition of affective response and hazard intrusiveness is hypothesized to improve the prediction of flood hazard adjustment adoption.
Section snippets
Correlates of household flood hazard adjustment adoption
Households’ flood hazard adjustments can be classified as structural, non-structural, and emergency preparedness. Structural hazard adjustments include elevating homes above base (”100-year”) flood level, installing external barriers to prevent water from entering the structure (dry floodproofing), and moving equipment such as furnaces to higher floors while allowing flood water to enter the structure (wet floodproofing). In contrast, non-structural measures include storing valuable items on
Research hypotheses
Based on the findings and limitations of previous research literature, this study examines the effects of risk perception and contextual variables on flood hazard adjustment adoption. Many studies have examined scales comprising multiple adjustments, but other studies have analyzed individual hazard adjustments, based on the rationale that these hazard adjustments might differ in the variables that predict them. For example, Brody et al. [12] reported that none of their ten independent
Study area and sample
Four coastal communities, two in Texas (Friendswood and League City) and two in Florida (Sarasota and Fort Meyers) were selected for this study. These jurisdictions have similar population sizes between 20,000 and 100,000 persons and share similar hydrological, elevation, and flood risk profiles associated with the Gulf of Mexico coast. A stratified random sample of 500 parcels within each community was drawn using the following flood zones: (i) within the FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain;
Descriptive analysis
Table 1 displays the descriptive statistics for all variables. Among the three hazard adjustment measures, respondents most often undertook emergency preparedness activities (M = 0.59), followed by non-structural mitigation (M = 0.29) and then structural mitigation (M = 0.07). Among the emergency preparedness items, a battery powered radio was the most common (M = 0.78) whereas a household flood emergency plan (M = 0.34) and a gas-powered electric generator (M = 0.33) were the least common.
Discussion
The fully specified models for all three categories of hazard adjustments—emergency preparedness, nonstructural mitigation, and structural mitigation—are limited by their low levels of reliability (α), which attenuates their correlations with other variables [72,73]. Values of α < 0.70 are sometimes dismissed as not meeting this “required level”, but this belief has no foundation in psychometric theory ([[74], [75]]). Instead, α should be used to determine if the reliability of a measure might
Conclusions
This research addresses an important challenge—understanding household adoption of flood hazard adjustments. Risk perception has been a major focus in the search for explanatory variables, but research on floods and other hazards has produced mixed results; some researchers report significant positive correlations between risk perception and hazard adjustment adoption, whereas others report nonsignificant correlations. The data in the present study yielded only modest correlations of the four
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on research supported by the US National Science Foundation (Grants 1129998 and 1826455). The findings and opinions reported are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the funding organization or those who provided assistance with various aspects of the study.
References (91)
- et al.
Factors of influence on flood damage mitigation behaviour by households
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2014) - et al.
Disaster preparedness and perception of flood risk: a study in an alpine valley in Italy
J. Environ. Psychol.
(2008) Status and power differentials in the generation of fear in three California earthquakes
Int. J. Disas. Risk Reduct.
(2016)- et al.
Washington households' expected responses to lahar threat from Mt. Rainier
Int. J. Disas. Risk Reduct.
(2017) - et al.
Willingness of homeowners to mitigate climate risk through insurance
Ecol. Econ.
(2009) Multi-hazard perceptions at Long Valley Caldera, California, USA
Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.
(2021)- et al.
Threat, coping and flood prevention–A meta-analysis
J. Environ. Psychol.
(2017) - et al.
Hurricane risk perceptions among Florida's single family homeowners
Landsc. Urban Plann.
(2005) - et al.
Victim pressure, institutional inertia and climate change adaptation: the case of flood risk
Global Environ. Change
(2011) - et al.
Rethinking the relationship between flood risk perception and flood management
Sci. Total Environ.
(2014)
Immediate behavioral response to the June 17, 2013 flash floods in Uttarakhand, North India
Int. J. Disas. Risk Reduct.
Multi-hazard perceptions at long Valley Caldera, California, USA
Int. J. Disas. Risk Reduct.
False discovery rate control is a recommended alternative to Bonferroni-type adjustments in health studies
J. Clin. Epidemiol.
Immediate behavioral response to the June 17, 2013 flash floods in Uttarakhand, North India
Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.
US floods: the necessity of mitigation
State Local Govern. Rev.
Repetitive flood victims and acceptance of FEMA mitigation offers: an analysis with community–system policy implications
Disasters
The Environment as Hazard
Fundamentals Of Emergency Management. Emmitsburg MD
Adoption and implementation of hazard adjustments
Int. J. Mass Emergencies Disasters
A review of risk perceptions and other factors that influence flood mitigation behavior
Risk Anal.
The impact of flood action groups on the uptake of flood management measures
Climatic Change
What motivates coastal households to adapt pro-actively to sea-level rise and increasing flood risk?
Reg. Environ. Change
Understanding the motivations of coastal residents to voluntarily purchase federal flood insurance
J. Risk Res.
Financing housing recovery through hazard insurance: the case of the National Flood Insurance Program
Household adjustment to flood risk: a survey of coastal residents in Texas and Florida, United States
Disasters
Extent, perception and mitigation of damage due to high groundwater levels in the city of Dresden, Germany
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
Individual preferences for reducing flood risk to near zero through elevation
Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Change
Flood risk perception and adaptation capacity: a contribution to the socio-hydrology debate
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of research
Environ. Behav.
Perception of risk
Science
Florida households' expected responses to hurricane hazard mitigation incentives
Risk Anal.
Household adoption of seismic hazard adjustments: a comparison of residents in two states
Int. J. Mass Emergencies Disasters
Waiting for Disaster: Earthquake Watch in California
Earthquake preparedness: predictors in a community survey
J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
Applying the Protective Action Decision Model to explain cyclone shutter installation behavior
Nat. Hazards Rev.
Communicating Environmental Risk in Multiethnic Communities
The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence
Risk Anal.
Households' perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment
Risk Anal.
Emotions, trust, and perceived risk: affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior
Risk Anal.
North American cities at risk: household responses to environmental hazards
Coping with risk: analysis on the importance of integrating social perceptions on flood risk into management mechanisms–The case of the municipality of Águeda, Portugal
J. Risk Res.
Flood risk management and shared responsibility: exploring Canadian public attitudes and expectations
J. Flood Risk Manag.
Perception of flood hazard in countries of the North Sea region of Europe
Nord. Hydrol
Public perception of the risks of floods: implications for communication
Risk Anal.
Households' perceived responsibilities in flood risk management in The Netherlands
Int. J. Water Resour. Dev.
Cited by (6)
Differences between the Effects of Direct and Indirect Earthquake Experiences on Disaster Preparedness
2024, Natural Hazards ReviewPerspectives on Emergency Preparedness Among Indigenous Pacific People in Hawaii: A Qualitative Study
2024, Journal of Community Health Nursing