IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i8p4141-d535997.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Factors Affecting Volunteers’ Willingness to Participate in Disaster Preparedness

Author

Listed:
  • Yingnan Ma

    (Beijing Research Center of Urban Systems Engineering, Beijing 100035, China)

  • Wei Zhu

    (Beijing Research Center of Urban Systems Engineering, Beijing 100035, China)

  • Huan Zhang

    (School of Social Development and Public Policy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Pengxia Zhao

    (Beijing Research Center of Urban Systems Engineering, Beijing 100035, China)

  • Yafei Wang

    (Beijing Research Center of Urban Systems Engineering, Beijing 100035, China)

  • Qiujie Zhang

    (School of Social Development and Public Policy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Department of Research Project, Beijing Vocational College of Labor and Social Security, Beijing 100029, China)

Abstract

Disaster preparedness is crucial for providing an effective response to, and reducing the possible impacts of, disasters. Although volunteers’ participation plays an important role in disaster preparedness, their actual participation in disaster preparedness activities is still low. To find ways to encourage more volunteers to participate, this study analyzed the social background and organizational and attitudinal factors affecting the volunteers’ willingness to participate. Questionnaires were distributed to 990 registered disaster volunteers across Beijing and the data were analyzed using linear regression models. Results revealed a weak willingness to participate in disaster preparedness. Only 28.08% of the respondents indicated that they were “very ready” to participate in voluntary disaster preparedness, and 14.65% showed “a little bit” of interest. The following was concluded: (1) Disaster volunteers’ social background variables were related to their willingness to participate in disaster preparedness. Compared to male volunteers, female volunteers were more willing to participate. Chinese Communist Party members were more willing to participate than non-members. (2) Providing accidental life insurance for the volunteers had a positive effect on their willingness to participate in disaster preparedness. Provision of more training had a negative effect on the volunteers’ willingness to participate, indicating a low quality of training. (3) Organizational identification was positively related to the volunteers’ willingness to participate. According to these results, we suggest that volunteer organizations should improve their standards and procedures for disaster volunteer recruitment and selection, and gain a deeper understanding of the needs of the disaster volunteers in order to better motivate them to participate.

Suggested Citation

  • Yingnan Ma & Wei Zhu & Huan Zhang & Pengxia Zhao & Yafei Wang & Qiujie Zhang, 2021. "The Factors Affecting Volunteers’ Willingness to Participate in Disaster Preparedness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-10, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:4141-:d:535997
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/4141/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/4141/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michal Titko & Jozef Ristvej & Zenon Zamiar, 2021. "Population Preparedness for Disasters and Extreme Weather Events as a Predictor of Building a Resilient Society: The Slovak Republic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-24, February.
    2. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    3. Rachel M. Adams & Beth Karlin & David P. Eisenman & Johanna Blakley & Deborah Glik, 2017. "Who Participates in the Great ShakeOut? Why Audience Segmentation Is the Future of Disaster Preparedness Campaigns," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, November.
    4. James Andreoni & A. Abigail Payne, 2003. "Do Government Grants to Private Charities Crowd Out Giving or Fund-raising?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 792-812, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:esx:essedp:762 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Katia Melnik & Jean-Benoît Zimmermann, 2008. "An Economic Approach To Voluntary Association," Working Papers halshs-00347448, HAL.
    3. Kevin C. Corinth, 2016. "A price theory of altruistic identity," AEI Economics Working Papers 901391, American Enterprise Institute.
    4. Kellner, Christian & Reinstein, David & Riener, Gerhard & Sanders, Michael, 2015. "Giving and Probability," Economics Discussion Papers 13794, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    5. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela & Parciasepe, Paolo, 2020. "Replication with MTurk of the experimental design by Gangadharan, Grossman, Jones & Leister (2018): Charitable giving across donor types," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Etilé, Fabrice & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and the economics of consumer social responsibility," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    7. Behrens, Christoph & Emrich, Eike & Hämmerle, Martin & Pierdzioch, Christian, 2017. "Match quality, crowding out, and crowding in: Empirical evidence for German sports clubs," Working Papers of the European Institute for Socioeconomics 21, European Institute for Socioeconomics (EIS), Saarbrücken.
    8. Jérôme Ballet & Damien Bazin & Abraham Lioui & David Touahri, 2006. "Taxation and The Crowding-Out Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility," Working Papers halshs-00113856, HAL.
    9. Krasteva, Silvana & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2013. "(Un)Informed charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 14-26.
    10. Sergey Efremov, 2014. "Uniting public funds and private donors financing to support nonprofit organizations," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 2, pages 195-222.
    11. Zachary Halberstam & James R. Hines Jr., 2023. "Quality-Aware Tax Incentives for Charitable Contributions," CESifo Working Paper Series 10250, CESifo.
    12. Woodward, Richard T. & Newburn, David A. & Mezzatesta, Mariano, 2016. "Additionality and reverse crowding out for pollution offsets in water quality trading," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 224-231.
    13. James Andreoni & Abigail Payne, 2007. "Crowding out Both Sides of the Philanthropy Market: Evidence from a Panel of Charities," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000001769, UCLA Department of Economics.
    14. Cappellari, Lorenzo & Ghinetti, Paolo & Turati, Gilberto, 2011. "On time and money donations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 853-867.
    15. Christian Kellner & David Reinstein & Gerhard Riener, 2017. "Conditional generosity and uncertain income: Evidence from five experiments," Discussion Papers 1707, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    16. Cozzi, Guido & Mantovan, Noemi & Sauer, Robert M., 2013. "Does it Pay to Work for Free? Wage Returns and Gender Differences in the Market for Volunteers," Economics Working Paper Series 1330, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    17. Andreoni, James & Payne, Abigail & Smith, Sarah, 2014. "Do grants to charities crowd out other income? Evidence from the UK," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 75-86.
    18. David T. Yi, 2010. "Determinants of fundraising efficiency of nonprofit organizations: evidence from US public charitable organizations," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), pages 465-475.
    19. Norwood Bailey & Lusk Jayson L, 2005. "Instrument-Induced Bias in Donation Mechanisms: Evidence from the Field," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-26, December.
    20. Gayle, Philip, 2024. "The extent to which government grants to nonprofit organizations crowd-out or crowd-in private giving to them: An unresolved debate revisited within a strategic fundraising setting," MPRA Paper 120685, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J. & Johnston, Rachel M., 2005. "An experimental test of the crowding out hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1543-1560, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:4141-:d:535997. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.