An official website of the United States government
Abstract Coastal communities are increasingly vulnerable to hurricanes, which cause billions of dollars in damage annually through wind, storm surge, and flooding. Mitigation efforts are essential to reduce these impacts but face significant challenges, including uncertainties in hazard prediction, damage estimation, and recovery costs. Resource constraints and the disproportionate burden borne by socioeconomically vulnerable groups further complicate retrofitting strategies. This study presents a probabilistic methodology to assess and mitigate hurricane risks by integrating hazard analysis, building fragility, and economic loss assessment. The methodology prioritizes retrofitting strategies using a risk‐informed, equity‐focused approach. Multi‐objective optimization balances cost‐effectiveness and risk reduction while promoting fair resource allocation among socioeconomic groups. The novelty of this study lies in its direct integration of equity as an objective in resource allocation through multi‐objective optimization, its comprehensive consideration of multi‐hazard risks, its inclusion of both direct and indirect losses in cost assessments, and its use of probabilistic hazard analysis to incorporate varying time horizons. A case study of the Galveston testbed demonstrates the methodology's potential to minimize damage and foster equitable resilience. Analysis of budget scenarios and trade‐offs between cost and equity underscores the importance of comprehensive loss assessments and equity considerations in mitigation and resilience planning. Key findings highlight the varied effectiveness of retrofitting strategies across different budgets and time horizons, the necessity of addressing both direct and indirect losses, and the importance of multi‐hazard considerations for accurate risk assessments. Multi‐objective optimization underscores that equitable solutions are achievable even under constrained budgets. Beyond a certain point, achieving equity does not necessarily increase expected losses, demonstrating that more equitable solutions can be implemented without compromising overall cost‐effectiveness.
more »
« less
Do actions reduce perceived risk? A longitudinal analysis of the relationship between risk perception and actions in response to forest disturbance in Colorado
As residents living in hazard-prone areas face on-going environmental threats, the actions they take to mitigate such risks are likely motivated by various factors. Whereas risk perception has been considered a key determinant of related behavioral responses, little is known about how risk mitigation actions influence subsequent perceived risk. In other words, do actions to prevent or mitigate risk reduce risk perception? This longitudinal study considers the dynamic relationships between risk perception and risk-mitigating behavior in the context of forest disturbance in north-central Colorado. Based on panel survey data collected in 2007 and 2018, the results provide a first look at changes in perceived forest risks as they relate to individual and community actions in response to an extensive mountain pine beetle outbreak. Analysis revealed that the perception of direct forest risks (forest fire and falling trees) increased, whereas indirect forest risk perception (concern on broader threats to local community) decreased across the two study phases. Higher individual or community activeness (level of actions) was associated with subsequent reductions in perceived forest fire risk, smaller increases in direct risk perception, and larger decreases in indirect risk perception. These findings contribute insights into the complex risk reappraisal process in forest hazard contexts, with direct implications for risk communication and management strategies.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1733990
- PAR ID:
- 10358538
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Risk Analysis
- ISSN:
- 0272-4332
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Recent research has used virtual environments (VEs), as presented via virtual reality (VR) headsets, to study human behavior in hypothetical fire scenarios. One goal of using VEs in fire scenarios is to elicit patterns of behavior which more closely align to how individuals would react to real fire emergency situations. The present study investigated whether elicited behaviors and perceived risk varied during fire scenarios presented as VEs via two viewing conditions. These included a VR condition, where the VE was rendered as 360-degree videos presented in a VR headset, and a screen condition, where VEs were rendered as fixed-view videos via a computer monitor screen. We predicted that the selection of actions during the scenario would vary between conditions, that participants would rate fires as more dangerous if they developed more quickly and when smoke was rendered as thicker, and that participants would report greater levels of immersion in the VR condition. A total of 159 participants completed a decision-making task where they viewed videos of an incipient fire in a residential building and judged what action to take. Initial action responses to the fire scenarios varied between both viewing and smoke conditions, with those assigned to the thicker smoke and screen conditions being more likely to take protective action. Risk ratings also varied by smoke condition, with evidence of higher perceived risk for thicker smoke. Several factors of self-reported immersion (namely ‘interest’, ‘emotional attachment’, ‘focus of attention’, and ‘flow’) were associated with risk ratings, with perceived presence associated with initial actions. The present study provides evidence that enhancing immersion and perceived risk in a VE contributes to a different pattern of behaviors during simulated fire decision-making tasks. While our investigation only addressed the ideas of presence in an environment, future research should investigate the relative contribution of interactivity and consequences within the environment to further identify how behaviors during simulated fire scenarios are affected by each of these factors.more » « less
-
Cross-sectional surveys, despite their value, are unable to probe dynamics of risk perceptions over time. An earlier longitudinal panel study of Americans’ views on Ebola risk inspired this partial replication on Americans’ views of Zika risks, using multilevel modeling to assess temporal changes in these views and inter-individual factors affecting them, and to determine if similar factors were influential for both non-epidemics in the USA. Baseline Zika risk scores – as in the Ebola study – were influenced by dread of the Zika virus, perceptions of a near-miss outbreak, and perceived likelihood of an outbreak. Judgments of both personal risk and national risk from Zika declined significantly, and individual rates of news following predicted slower decline of perceived national risk in both cases. However, few other factors affected changes in Zika risk judgments, which did not replicate in a validation half-sample, whereas several factors slowed or increased the rate of decline in Ebola judgments of the U.S. risk. These differences might reflect differences in the diseases caused by these two viruses – e.g., Ebola’s much greater lethality – but more longitudinal studies across multiple diseases will be needed to test that speculation. Benefits of such studies to health risk analysis outweigh the difficulties they pose.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Forest disturbances caused by insects, pathogens, and fire continue to increasingly occur within forests across the United States and around the world. Given the dynamic nature of these forest disturbances and the role played by local residents in risk management, it is valuable to explore how the human experience, attitudes, and behaviors associated with these ecological processes may evolve over time. In this paper, we assess temporal changes in local residents’ perceptions and actions in response to the mountain pine beetle outbreak that affected large swaths of forests in north central Colorado. Through analyses of secondary and household survey data from 2007 and 2018, we note significant changes in these aspects and identify factors consistently associated with individual and community activeness. The study contributes to knowledge of dynamic socioecological considerations of forest disturbances and improves understanding of how social sciences can help to identify opportunities and barriers to effective forest ecosystem management.more » « less
-
Identifying and understanding risk perceptions—“how bad are the harms” to humans or to what they value that people see as potentially or actually arising from entities or events—has been critical for risk analysis, both for its own sake, and for expected associations between risk perceptions and subsequent outcomes, such as risky or protective behavior, or support for hazard management policies. Cross-sectional surveys have been the dominant method for identifying and understanding risk perceptions, yielding valuable data. However, cross-sectional surveys are unable to probe the dynamics of risk perceptions over time, which is critical to do while living in a dynamically hazardous world and to build causal understandings. Building upon earlier longitudinal panel studies of Americans’ Ebola and Zika risk perceptions using multi-level modeling to assess temporal changes in these views and inter-individual factors affecting them, we examined patterns in Americans’ COVID-19 risk perceptions in six waves across 14 months. The findings suggest that, in general, risk perceptions increased from February 2020 to April 2021, but with varying trends across different risk perception measures (personal, collective, affective, affect, severity, and duration). Factors in baseline risk perceptions (Wave 1) and inter-individual differences across waves differed even more: baseline ratings were associated with how immediate the threat is (temporal distance) and how likely the threat would affect people like oneself (social distance), and following the United States news about the pandemic. Inter-individual trend differences were shaped most by temporal distance, whether local coronavirus infections were accelerating their upward trend, and subjective knowledge about viral transmission. Associations of subjective knowledge and risk trend with risk perceptions could change signs (e.g. from positive to negative) over time. These findings hold theoretical implications for risk perception dynamics and taxonomies, and research design implications for studying risk perception dynamics and their comparison across hazards.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14023
