IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v7y2020i1d10.1057_s41599-020-00613-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Earthquake early warning in Aotearoa New Zealand: a survey of public perspectives to guide warning system development

Author

Listed:
  • Julia S. Becker

    (Massey University)

  • Sally H. Potter

    (GNS Science)

  • Lauren J. Vinnell

    (Massey University)

  • Kazuya Nakayachi

    (Doshisha University)

  • Sara K. McBride

    (United States Geological Survey)

  • David M. Johnston

    (Massey University)

Abstract

Earthquake early warning (EEW) can be used to detect earthquakes and provide advanced notification of strong shaking, allowing pre-emptive actions to be taken that not only benefit infrastructure but reduce injuries and fatalities. Currently Aotearoa New Zealand does not have a nationwide EEW system, so a survey of the public was undertaken to understand whether EEW was considered useful and acceptable by the public, as well as perceptions of how and when such warnings should be communicated, before making an investment in such technology. We surveyed the public’s perspectives (N = 3084) on the usefulness of EEW, preferred system attributes, and what people anticipated doing on receipt of a warning. We found strong support for EEW, for the purposes of being able to undertake actions to protect oneself and others (e.g. family, friends, and pets), and to mentally prepare for shaking. In terms of system attributes, respondents expressed a desire for being warned at a threshold of shaking intensity MM5–6. They suggested a preference for receiving a warning via mobile phone, supported by other channels. In addition to being warned about impending shaking, respondents wanted to receive messages that alerted them to other attributes of the earthquake (including the possibility of additional hazards such as tsunami), and what actions to take. People’s anticipated actions on receipt of a warning varied depending on the time available from the warning to arrival of shaking. People were more likely to undertake quicker and easier actions for shorter timeframes of

Suggested Citation

  • Julia S. Becker & Sally H. Potter & Lauren J. Vinnell & Kazuya Nakayachi & Sara K. McBride & David M. Johnston, 2020. "Earthquake early warning in Aotearoa New Zealand: a survey of public perspectives to guide warning system development," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:7:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-00613-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-020-00613-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-020-00613-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-020-00613-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Johnston & Sarah Standring & Kevin Ronan & Michael Lindell & Thomas Wilson & Jim Cousins & Emma Aldridge & Michael Ardagh & Joanne Deely & Steven Jensen & Thomas Kirsch & Richard Bissell, 2014. "The 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes: context and cause of injury," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 73(2), pages 627-637, September.
    2. Kazuya Nakayachi & Julia S. Becker & Sally H. Potter & Maximilian Dixon, 2019. "Residents’ Reactions to Earthquake Early Warnings in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1723-1740, August.
    3. Gabriele Prati & Elisa Saccinto & Luca Pietrantoni & Carles Pérez-Testor, 2013. "The 2012 Northern Italy Earthquakes: modelling human behaviour," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 69(1), pages 99-113, October.
    4. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    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. Kazuya Nakayachi & Julia S. Becker & Sally H. Potter & Maximilian Dixon, 2019. "Residents’ Reactions to Earthquake Early Warnings in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1723-1740, August.
    2. Emily S. Lambie & Thomas M. Wilson & Erik Brogt & David M. Johnston & Michael Ardagh & Joanne Deely & Steven Jensen & Shirley Feldmann-Jensen, 2017. "Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Earthquake Behaviour Coding Methodology: analysis of Christchurch Public Hospital video data from the 22 February Christchurch earthquake event," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 86(3), pages 1175-1192, April.
    3. Annabelle Workman & Penelope J. Jones & Amanda J. Wheeler & Sharon L. Campbell & Grant J. Williamson & Chris Lucani & David M.J.S. Bowman & Nick Cooling & Fay H. Johnston, 2021. "Environmental Hazards and Behavior Change: User Perspectives on the Usability and Effectiveness of the AirRater Smartphone App," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-19, March.
    4. David V. Pynadath & Bistra Dilkina & David C. Jeong & Richard S. John & Stacy C. Marsella & Chirag Merchant & Lynn C. Miller & Stephen J. Read, 2023. "Disaster world," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 84-117, March.
    5. Manqing Wu & Guochun Wu, 2020. "An Analysis of Rural Households’ Earthquake-Resistant Construction Behavior: Evidence from Pingliang and Yuxi, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Ji Yun Lee & Fangjiao Ma & Yue Li, 2022. "Understanding homeowner proactive actions for managing wildfire risks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(2), pages 1525-1547, November.
    7. Michael R. Greenberg & Marc D. Weiner & Robert Noland & Jeanne Herb & Marjorie Kaplan & Anthony J. Broccoli, 2014. "Public Support for Policies to Reduce Risk After Hurricane Sandy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 997-1012, June.
    8. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Taixiang Duan & Hechao Jiang & Xiangshu Deng & Qiongwen Zhang & Fang Wang, 2020. "Government Intervention, Risk Perception, and the Adoption of Protective Action Recommendations: Evidence from the COVID-19 Prevention and Control Experience of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Raul P. Lejano & Muhammad Saidur Rahman & Laila Kabir, 2020. "Risk Communication for Empowerment: Interventions in a Rohingya Refugee Settlement," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2360-2372, November.
    11. Joop de Boer & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Teun Terpstra, 2014. "Improving Flood Risk Communication by Focusing on Prevention‐Focused Motivation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 309-322, February.
    12. Morshedi, Mohamad Ali & Kashani, Hamed, 2022. "Assessment of vulnerability reduction policies: Integration of economic and cognitive models of decision-making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    13. Ye, Maoxin & Lyu, Zeyu, 2020. "Trust, risk perception, and COVID-19 infections: Evidence from multilevel analyses of combined original dataset in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    14. Yingying Sun & Katsuya Yamori, 2018. "Risk Management and Technology: Case Studies of Tsunami Evacuation Drills in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, August.
    15. Anna-Maria Aksan & William F. Vásquez, 2019. "Quality Perceptions and Water Treatment Behavior at the Household Level," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-33, July.
    16. Ao Zhang & Hao Yang & Zhenlei Tian & Shuning Tong, 2022. "Evolution Model and Simulation Study of the Public Risk Perception of COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-29, September.
    17. Yu Song & Jia Liu & Qian Liu, 2021. "Dynamic Decision-Making Process of Evacuees during Post-Earthquake Evacuation near an Automatic Flap Barrier Gate System: A Broken Windows Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Jennifer M. First & Kelsey Ellis & Mary Lehman Held & Florence Glass, 2021. "Identifying Risk and Resilience Factors Impacting Mental Health among Black and Latinx Adults following Nocturnal Tornadoes in the U.S. Southeast," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Wei Qi & Xiumei Guo & Xia Wu & Dora Marinova & Jin Fan, 2018. "Do the sunk cost effect and cognitive dissonance increase risk perception? An empirical study in the context of city smog," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2269-2289, September.
    20. Junji Urata & Adam J. Pel, 2018. "People's Risk Recognition Preceding Evacuation and Its Role in Demand Modeling and Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 889-905, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:7:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-00613-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.