IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v73y2014i3p2127-2147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Main issues of an evacuation in case of volcanic crisis: social stakes in Guadeloupe (Lesser Antilles Arc)

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Chenet
  • Delphine Grancher
  • Marie Redon

Abstract

The last major eruption of La Soufrière volcano in Guadeloupe (Lesser Antilles) in 1976–1977 caused the mass evacuation of part of the population, whereby a total of 76,000 people were displaced for a period of 3–6 months. This evacuation has left a bitter memory among the inhabitants who believed that the political authorities of the time had not anticipated the possibility of an eruption crisis and that decisions were taken in haste. La Soufrière remains active, and future eruptions could once again lead to partial or even total evacuation of the population if there were a major Plinian eruption. This article offers an investigation of future evacuation procedures, questioning different aspects of Guadeloupe’s current territorial and social challenges (the multi-risk context, the reporting to the scientists and to the authorities, the importance of local solidarity). In order to do so, we used the Focus Group Discussion method, making it possible to identify resources and gaps in crisis management on the basis of previous event history. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Chenet & Delphine Grancher & Marie Redon, 2014. "Main issues of an evacuation in case of volcanic crisis: social stakes in Guadeloupe (Lesser Antilles Arc)," 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(3), pages 2127-2147, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:73:y:2014:i:3:p:2127-2147
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-014-1184-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-014-1184-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-014-1184-6?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. Laurie Pearce, 2003. "Disaster Management and Community Planning, and Public Participation: How to Achieve Sustainable Hazard Mitigation," 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. 28(2), pages 211-228, March.
    2. Kaplowitz, Michael D. & Hoehn, John P., 2001. "Do focus groups and individual interviews reveal the same information for natural resource valuation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 237-247, February.
    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. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2016. "Labor Donation Or Money Donation? Pro-Sociality On Prevention Of Natural Disasters In A Case Of Cyclone Aila, Bangladesh," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(01), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Jan Hanousek & Randall K. Filer, 2001. "Consumers' Opinion of Inflation Bias Due to Quality Improvements in Transition in the Czech Republic," Development and Comp Systems 0110009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Heather Rosoff & Robert Siko & Richard John & William J. Burns, 2013. "Should I stay or should I go? An experimental study of health and economic government policies following a severe biological agent release," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 121-137, March.
    4. Libor Dusek & Lubomir Lizal (ed.), 2011. "CERGE-EI Tackles Transition," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b05, May.
    5. Hanousek, Jan & Filer, Randall K, 2004. "Consumers' Opinion of Inflation Bias Due to Quality Improvements," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(1), pages 235-254, October.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Martiskainen, Mari & Hook, Andrew & Baker, Lucy, 2020. "Beyond cost and carbon: The multidimensional co-benefits of low carbon transitions in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Spash, Clive L. & Vatn, Arild, 2006. "Transferring environmental value estimates: Issues and alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 379-388, December.
    8. Pankaj Jaiswal & Cees Westen, 2013. "Use of quantitative landslide hazard and risk information for local disaster risk reduction along a transportation corridor: a case study from Nilgiri district, India," 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. 65(1), pages 887-913, January.
    9. Jorge León & Alan March, 2016. "An urban form response to disaster vulnerability: Improving tsunami evacuation in Iquique, Chile," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 826-847, September.
    10. Alistair Munro, 2020. "Using experimental manipulation of questionnaire design and a Kenyan panel to test for the reliability of reported perceptions of climate change and adaptation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1081-1105, October.
    11. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2021. "On Adding-Up as a Validity Criterion for Stated-Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(3), pages 587-601, November.
    12. Yi Lixin & Cheng Ke & Cao Xiaoying & Sun Yueling & Cheng Xiaoqing & He Ye, 2017. "Analysis of social vulnerability of residential community to hazards in Tianjin, China," 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. 87(2), pages 1223-1243, June.
    13. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    14. Hoehn, John P. & Randall, Alan, 2002. "The effect of resource quality information on resource injury perceptions and contingent values," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 13-31, February.
    15. Camilo Gomez & Andrés D. González & Hiba Baroud & Claudia D. Bedoya‐Motta, 2019. "Integrating Operational and Organizational Aspects in Interdependent Infrastructure Network Recovery," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(9), pages 1913-1929, September.
    16. Svedsater, Henrik, 2007. "Ambivalent statements in contingent valuation studies: inclusive response formats and giving respondents time to think," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(01), pages 1-17.
    17. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    18. Mariam Maki Sy & Charles Figuières & Hélène Rey-Valette & Richard B. Howarth & Rutger Wit, 2024. "Valuation of ecosystem services and social choice: the impact of deliberation in the context of two different aggregation rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(3), pages 619-640, November.
    19. Wilson, Matthew A. & Howarth, Richard B., 2002. "Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 431-443, June.
    20. A. Lara & X. Garcia & F. Bucci & A. Ribas, 2017. "What do people think about the flood risk? An experience with the residents of Talcahuano city, Chile," 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. 85(3), pages 1557-1575, February.

    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:73:y:2014:i:3:p:2127-2147. 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.