IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v104y2020i2d10.1007_s11069-020-04217-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The likelihood of having a household emergency plan: understanding factors in the US context

Author

Listed:
  • Jason D. Rivera

    (SUNY Buffalo State)

Abstract

Individual household emergency planning is the most fundamental and can be the least expensive way to prepare for natural disasters. However, despite government and nonprofit educational campaigns, many Americans still do not have a household plan. Using a national sample of Americans, this research observes factors that influence people’s likelihood of developing a household emergency plan. Based on the analysis, people’s efficacy in preparedness activities, previous exposure to disasters and preparedness information positively influence the likelihood that someone will have developed a household emergency plan. Alternatively, demographic variables such as being Hispanic/Latino, identifying as Asian, and being a renter decrease the likelihood that someone will have developed a plan in the American context. But, the reason for these negative relationships are unclear. Subsequent to the analysis, recommendations for future research are provided to better understand observed relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason D. Rivera, 2020. "The likelihood of having a household emergency plan: understanding factors in the US context," 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. 104(2), pages 1331-1343, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:104:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-020-04217-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-020-04217-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-020-04217-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-020-04217-z?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. Jennifer E. C. Lee & Louise Lemyre, 2009. "A Social‐Cognitive Perspective of Terrorism Risk Perception and Individual Response in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1265-1280, September.
    2. Ingrid M. Martin & Holly Bender & Carol Raish, 2007. "What Motivates Individuals to Protect Themselves from Risks: The Case of Wildland Fires," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 887-900, August.
    3. Michele M. Wood & Dennis S. Mileti & Megumi Kano & Melissa M. Kelley & Rotrease Regan & Linda B. Bourque, 2012. "Communicating Actionable Risk for Terrorism and Other Hazards⋆," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 601-615, April.
    4. Michael K. Lindell & Sudha Arlikatti & Carla S. Prater, 2009. "Why People Do What They Do to Protect Against Earthquake Risk: Perceptions of Hazard Adjustment Attributes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1072-1088, August.
    5. Michael K. Lindell & David J. Whitney, 2000. "Correlates of Household Seismic Hazard Adjustment Adoption," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 13-26, February.
    6. Sıdıka Tekeli‐Yeşil & Necati Dedeoğlu & Charlotte Braun‐Fahrlaender & Marcel Tanner, 2010. "Factors Motivating Individuals to Take Precautionary Action for an Expected Earthquake in Istanbul," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(8), pages 1181-1195, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhen Cong & Zhirui Chen, 2022. "How are Asian-Americans different from other races in disaster preparedness in the context of caregiving responsibilities and preparation information access?," 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. 112(3), pages 2217-2236, July.

    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. Sıdıka Tekeli‐Yeşil & Necati Dedeoğlu & Charlotte Braun‐Fahrlaender & Marcel Tanner, 2010. "Factors Motivating Individuals to Take Precautionary Action for an Expected Earthquake in Istanbul," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(8), pages 1181-1195, August.
    2. Wang, Fei & Yuan, Yu & Lu, Liangdong, 2021. "Dynamical prediction model of consumers’ purchase intentions regarding anti-smog products during smog risk: Taking the information flow perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    3. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Pamela C. Cisternas & Paula B. Repetto & Javiera V. Castañeda & Eliana Guic, 2020. "Understanding the Relationship Between Direct Experience and Risk Perception of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2057-2070, October.
    4. Hao-Teng Cheng & Ko-Wan Tsou, 2018. "Mitigation Policy Acceptance Model: An Analysis of Individual Decision Making Process toward Residential Seismic Strengthening," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-12, August.
    5. Daniela Knuth & Doris Kehl & Lynn Hulse & Silke Schmidt, 2014. "Risk Perception, Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1286-1298, July.
    6. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    7. Yaodong Yang & Huaqing Ren & Han Zhang, 2022. "Understanding Consumer Panic Buying Behaviors during the Strict Lockdown on Omicron Variant: A Risk Perception View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Abdul‐Akeem Sadiq & John D. Graham, 2016. "Exploring the Predictors of Organizational Preparedness for Natural Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 1040-1053, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Tianzhuo Liu & Huifang Jiao, 2018. "Insights into the Effects of Cognitive Factors and Risk Attitudes on Fire Risk Mitigation Behavior," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 1213-1232, December.
    11. Yue ‘Gurt’ Ge & Michael K Lindell, 2016. "County planners’ perceptions of land-use planning tools for environmental hazard mitigation: A survey in the U.S. Pacific states," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(4), pages 716-736, July.
    12. Yilin Zou & Alexia Stock & Rachel Davidson & Linda Nozick & Joseph Trainor & Jamie Kruse, 2020. "Perceived attributes of hurricane-related retrofits and their effect on household adoption," 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. 104(1), pages 201-224, October.
    13. An Gie Yong & Louise Lemyre & Celine Pinsent & Daniel Krewski, 2017. "Risk Perception and Disaster Preparedness in Immigrants and Canadian‐Born Adults: Analysis of a National Survey on Similarities and Differences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2321-2333, December.
    14. Yue Ge & Walter Gillis Peacock & Michael K. Lindell, 2011. "Florida Households’ Expected Responses to Hurricane Hazard Mitigation Incentives," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1676-1691, October.
    15. Ilona M. McNeill & Patrick D. Dunlop & Jonathan B. Heath & Timothy C. Skinner & David L. Morrison, 2013. "Expecting the Unexpected: Predicting Physiological and Psychological Wildfire Preparedness from Perceived Risk, Responsibility, and Obstacles," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1829-1843, October.
    16. Mengtian Zhao & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2019. "Media Disaster Reporting Effects on Public Risk Perception and Response to Escalating Tornado Warnings: A Natural Experiment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 535-552, March.
    17. Gabriele Prati & Luca Pietrantoni, 2016. "Knowledge, Risk Perceptions, and Xenophobic Attitudes: Evidence from Italy During the Ebola Outbreak," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(10), pages 2000-2010, October.
    18. Zhixing Ma & Shili Guo & Xin Deng & Dingde Xu, 2021. "Community resilience and resident's disaster preparedness: evidence from China's earthquake-stricken areas," 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. 108(1), pages 567-591, August.
    19. S. A. Mashi & A. I. Inkani & Oghenejeabor Obaro & A. S. Asanarimam, 2020. "Community perception, response and adaptation strategies towards flood risk in a traditional African city," 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. 103(2), pages 1727-1759, September.
    20. Zeng, Yadi & Xiao, Gensen & Ye, Baojuan & Zhang, Yanzhen & Liu, Mingfan & Wang, Xinqiang & Yang, Qiang, 2022. "The relationship between risk perception of COVID-19 and willingness to help: A moderated mediation model," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

    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:spr:nathaz:v:104:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-020-04217-z. 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: http://www.springer.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.