The role of response efficacy and self-efficacy in disaster preparedness actions for vulnerable households
-
Published:2023-12-14
Issue:12
Volume:23
Page:3789-3803
-
ISSN:1684-9981
-
Container-title:Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Qiu Dong,Lv Binglin,Cui Yuepeng,Zhan Zexiong
Abstract
Abstract. The effects of response efficacy and self-efficacy on disaster preparedness have been widely reported. However, most studies only prove their relationship to disaster preparedness in general terms without ascertaining whether they also variously impact the disaster preparedness of diverse vulnerable families (i.e., caring for older and/or disabled adults (COD), caring for a child (CC), and low capacity (LC)). In this study, disaster preparedness is divided into two dependent variables: adequate and minimal preparedness. A quantitative analysis was conducted using 4559 samples drawn from the 2021 National Household Survey to investigate the relationship between response efficacy and self-efficacy with preparedness measures adopted by vulnerable households. Binary logistic regression results indicated that households with vulnerable groups are generally more likely to report lower disaster preparedness. Response efficacy is more critical to LC and COD families, while self-efficacy is more important to LC and CC families. Based on these findings, interventions can be tailored to suit different family types and help vulnerable families better prepare for disasters.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference67 articles.
1. Adame, B. J. and Miller, C. H.: Vested Interest, Disaster Preparedness, and Strategic Campaign Message Design, Health Commun., 30, 271–281, https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2013.842527, 2015. 2. Adams, R. M., Rivard, H., and Eisenman, D. P.: Who Participates in Building Disaster Resilient Communities: A Cluster-Analytic Approach, J. Public Health Man., 23, 37–46, https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000387, 2017. 3. Attems, M., Thaler, T., Genovese, E., and Fuchs, S.: Implementation of property-level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures: Choices and decisions, WIREs Water, 7, e1404, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1404, 2020a. 4. Attems, M.-S., Thaler, T., Snel, K. A. W., Davids, P., Hartmann, T., and Fuchs, S.: The influence of tailored risk communication on individual adaptive behaviour, Int. J. Disast. Risk Re., 49, 101618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101618, 2020b. 5. 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.
|
|