IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v78y2015i1p555-567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Whether a large disaster could change public concern and risk perception: a case study of the 7/21 extraordinary rainstorm disaster in Beijing in 2012

Author

Listed:
  • Yun Su
  • Fan Zhao
  • Lingzhao Tan

Abstract

Improving social concerns relating to floods and the perception of the public to risk can reduce the risk of urban flood disasters. This study investigates whether social concern regarding disaster is greatly increased by an extraordinary rainstorm, and whether such disasters change the public’s risk perception and stimulate them to take effective disaster prevention measures. An extraordinary rainstorm disaster—known the 7/21 disaster—occurred in Beijing, China, on July 21, 2012. This resulted in 79 deaths and a direct economic loss of 11.64 billion RMB (approximately 1.80 billion USD). Using this disaster as an example, this paper analyzes Beijing’s daily precipitation data in the 2012 and 2013 flood seasons and measures the degree of social concern before and after the disaster and the relationship between the degree of social concern and the precipitation intensity. The results indicate that the rainstorm rapidly increased the degree of social concern from 0.12 to 0.77; however, concern had stabilized by 2013 and was basically consistent with the precipitation amounts. A random sample of 181 people participated in a questionnaire survey. The results indicate that the level of public risk perception significantly increased post-disaster, with the degree of public concern regarding rainstorm risk and the number of people who implemented disaster prevention and preparedness measures being doubled. Moreover, approximately 75 % of the disaster prevention behavior involved observing early warning information and going out less, i.e., reducing exposure. But, this response was only a temporary adjustment phenomenon, lasting approximately 1 month: Entry-Transition on July 21 and Exit-Transition on August 30. Moreover, public behavior changes are limited to the year in which a disaster occurs: In the flood season of 2013, 62 % of the population did not appear to be affected by the 2012 precipitation results. Therefore, the majority of the public will not establish long-term risk prevention awareness as a result of an extraordinary disaster. Strengthening public awareness of disaster risk requires a long-term effort. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Yun Su & Fan Zhao & Lingzhao Tan, 2015. "Whether a large disaster could change public concern and risk perception: a case study of the 7/21 extraordinary rainstorm disaster in Beijing in 2012," 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. 78(1), pages 555-567, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:78:y:2015:i:1:p:555-567
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-015-1730-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-015-1730-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-015-1730-x?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. Loewenstein, George & Mather, Jane, 1990. "Dynamic Processes in Risk Perception," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 155-175, June.
    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. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Qing Yang & Ying Sun & Xingxing Liu & Jinmei Wang, 2020. "MAS-Based Evacuation Simulation of an Urban Community during an Urban Rainstorm Disaster in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Qin, Hua & Sanders, Christine & Prasetyo, Yanu & Syukron, Muh. & Prentice, Elizabeth, 2021. "Exploring the dynamic relationships between risk perception and behavior in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).

    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. McCluskey, Jill & Rausser, Gordon C., 2000. "Estimation of perceived risk and its effect on property values," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt46x0r71b, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Drakos, Konstantinos & Müller, Cathérine, 2011. "Terrorism risk concern in Europe," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 195-197, August.
    3. Qin, Hua & Sanders, Christine & Prasetyo, Yanu & Syukron, Muh. & Prentice, Elizabeth, 2021. "Exploring the dynamic relationships between risk perception and behavior in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    4. Martin-Lapoirie, Dylan & McColl, Kathleen & Gallopel-Morvan, Karine & Arwidson, Pierre & Raude, Jocelyn, 2024. "Health protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic: Risk adaptation or habituation?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 342(C).
    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. Jill J. McCluskey & Gordon C. Rausser, 2001. "Estimation of Perceived Risk and Its Effect on Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 42-55.
    7. Jacqueline Meijer-Irons, 2015. "Who perceives what? A demographic analysis of subjective perception in rural Thailand," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 13(1), pages 167-191.
    8. David P. Durham & Elizabeth A. Casman & Steven M. Albert, 2012. "Deriving Behavior Model Parameters from Survey Data: Self‐Protective Behavior Adoption During the 2009–2010 Influenza A(H1N1) Pandemic," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2020-2031, December.
    9. Busby, J.S., 2019. "The co-evolution of competition and parasitism in the resource-based view: A risk model of product counterfeiting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 300-313.
    10. Islam, Marco, 2021. "Motivated Risk Assessments," Working Papers 2021:12, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 26 Jul 2022.
    11. Rachael Piltch‐Loeb & Brian J. Zikmund‐Fisher & Victoria A. Shaffer & Laura D. Scherer & Megan Knaus & Angie Fagerlin & David M. Abramson & Aaron M. Scherer, 2019. "Cross‐Sectional Psychological and Demographic Associations of Zika Knowledge and Conspiracy Beliefs Before and After Local Zika Transmission," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2683-2693, December.
    12. Konstantinos Drakos & Catherine Mueller, 2014. "On the Determinants of Terrorism Risk Concern in Europe," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 291-310, June.
    13. Dora L. Costa & Matthew E. Kahn, 2017. "Death and the Media: Infectious Disease Reporting During the Health Transition," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(335), pages 393-416, July.
    14. May O. Lwin & Jiahui Lu & Anita Sheldenkar & Peter J. Schulz, 2018. "Strategic Uses of Facebook in Zika Outbreak Communication: Implications for the Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
    15. Schauf, Andrew & Oh, Poong, 2021. "Adaptation strategies and collective dynamics of extraction in networked commons of bistable resources," SocArXiv wmtqk, Center for Open Science.
    16. Busby, J.S. & Onggo, B.S.S. & Liu, Y., 2016. "Agent-based computational modelling of social risk responses," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 1029-1042.
    17. Raude, Jocelyn & MCColl, Kathleen & Flamand, Claude & Apostolidis, Themis, 2019. "Understanding health behaviour changes in response to outbreaks: Findings from a longitudinal study of a large epidemic of mosquito-borne disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 184-193.

    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:78:y:2015:i:1:p:555-567. 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.