Although research indicates that adoption of flood preparations among Europeans is low, only a few studies have attempted to explain citizens’ preparedness behavior. This article applies the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) to explain flood preparedness intentions in the Netherlands. Survey data (N = 1,115) showed that hazard-related attributes (e.g., perceived efficacy in protecting persons) were positively correlated, but failed to show that resource-related attributes (e.g., perceived costs) were negatively correlated with preparedness intentions. Although respondents rated the hazard-related attributes as more important than the resource-related attributes, moderated regression failed to detect practically meaningful interaction effects. Risk perception was also positively correlated with preparedness intentions but explained less variance than did the hazard-related attributes. Among the demographic characteristics, only female gender was consistently correlated with higher risk perception and the hazard-related attributes. Finally, risk area was correlated with perceived flood likelihood and consequences as well as the hazard-related attributes. Implications are discussed.
AdeolaF. O. (2000). Endangered community enduring people—Toxic contamination, health, and adaptive responses in a local context. Environment and Behavior, 32, 209-249.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3.
BarredoJ. I.SalamonP.FeyenL.DankersR.BódisK.De RooA. (2008). Flood damage potential in Europe. Luxembourg, Europe: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
4.
CurtinR.PresserS.SingerE. (2000). The effects of response rate changes on the index of consumer sentiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 413-428.
5.
DavidsonD. J.FreudenbergW. R. (1996). Gender and environmental risk concerns: A review and analysis of available research. Environment and Behavior, 28, 302-339.
6.
EdwardsJ. R. (2009). Seven deadly myths of testing moderation in organizational research. In LanceC. E.VandenbergR. J. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends (pp. 143-164). New York, NY: Routledge.
7.
EgliT. (2002). Non structural floodplain management: Measures and their effectiveness. Sankt Augustin, Germany: International Commission for Protection of the Rhine (ICPR).
8.
European Floods Directive. (2007). Directive 2007/60/ec of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks. Official Journal of the European Union, 50, 27-34.
9.
FishbeinM.AjzenI. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10.
FloydD. L.Prentice-DunnS.RogersR. W. (2000). A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 407-429.
11.
FothergillA. (1996). Gender, risk, and disaster. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 14, 33-56. Available from www.ijmed.org
12.
FothergillA.MaestasE. G. M.DarlingtonJ. D. (1999). Race, ethnicity and disasters in the United States: A review of the literature. Disasters, 23, 156-173.
13.
FothergillA.PeekL. A. (2004). Poverty and disasters in the United States: A review of recent sociological findings. Natural Hazards, 32(1), 89-110.
14.
Goudappel Coffeng. (2004). NRM-basisbestand 2004 [NRM-database 2004]. Delft: Rijkswaterstaat: Dienst Verkeer en Scheepvaart [Centre for Transport and Navigation].
15.
GrothmannT.ReusswigF. (2006). People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Natural Hazards, 38, 101-120.
16.
KeeterS.MillerC.KohutA.GrovesR. M.PresserS. (2000). Consequences of reducing nonresponse in a national telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 125-148.
17.
KellensW.TerpstraT.De MaeyerP. (2012), Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Risk Analysis. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01844.x
18.
KievikM.GuttelingJ. M. (2011). Yes we can: Motivate Dutch citizens to engage in self-protective behavior with regard to flood risks. Natural Hazards, 59, 1475-1490.
19.
KrasovskaiaI.GottschalkL.IbrekkA. S.BergH. (2007). Perception of flood hazard in countries of the North Sea region of Europe. Nordic Hydrology, 38, 387-399.
20.
LindellM. K. (with AleschD.BoltonP. A.GreeneM. R.LarsonL. A.LopesR. . . . WhitneyD. J.). (1997). Adoption and implementation of hazard adjustments. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters Special Issue, 15, 327-453. Available from www.ijmed.org
21.
LindellM. K. (in press). North American cities at risk: Household responses to environmental hazards. In RossettoT.JoffeH.AdamsJ. (Eds.), Cities at risk: Living with perils in the 21st century. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
22.
LindellM. K.ArlikattiS.PraterC. S. (2009). Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: Perceptions of hazard adjustments and their attributes. Risk Analysis, 29, 1072-1088.
23.
LindellM. K.HwangS. N. (2008). Households’ perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment. Risk Analysis, 28, 539-556.
24.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (1990). Effects of the Chernobyl accident on public perceptions of nuclear plant accident risks. Risk Analysis, 10, 393-399.
25.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (1992). Behavioral foundations of community emergency planning. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.
26.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (2000). Household adjustment to earthquake hazard—A review of research. Environment and Behavior, 32, 461-501.
27.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (2004). Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (2012). The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Analysis, 32, 616-632.
29.
LindellM. K.PraterC. S. (2002). Risk area residents’ perceptions and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2377-2392.
30.
LindellM. K.WhitneyD. J. (2000). Correlates of seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Analysis, 20, 13-25.
31.
ManfredaK. L.BosnjakM.BerzelakJ.HaasI.VehovarV. (2008). Web surveys versus other survey modes: A meta-analysis comparing response rates. International Journal of Market Research, 50, 79-104.
32.
MiletiD. S.FitzpatrickC. (1992). The causal sequence of risk communication in the Parkfield earthquake prediction experiment. Risk Analysis, 12, 393-400.
NewmanD. A. (2009). Missing data techniques and low response rates. In LanceC. E.VandenbergR. J. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends (pp. 7-36). New York, NY: Routledge.
35.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
36.
RogersR. W.Prentice-DunnS. (1997). Protection motivation theory. In GochmanD. S. (Ed.), Handbook of health behavior research (pp. 113-132). New York, NY: Plenum.
37.
TerpstraT. (2011). Emotions, trust and perceived risk: Affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior. Risk Analysis, 31(10), 1658-1675.
38.
TerpstraT.GuttelingJ. M. (2008). Households’ perceived responsibilities in flood risk management in the Netherlands. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 24, 555-565.
39.
TerpstraT.LindellM. K.GuttelingJ. M. (2009). Does communicating (flood) risk affect (flood) risk perceptions? Results of a quasi-experimental study. Risk Analysis, 29, 1141-1155.
40.
Van der PligtJ.De VriesN. K.MansteadA. S. R.Van HarreveldF. (2000). The importance of being selective: Weighing the role of attribute importance. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 32, pp. 135-200). New York, NY: Academic Press.
41.
Van HarreveldF.Van der PligtJ. (2004). Attitudes as stable and transparent constructions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 666-674.
42.
ZaalbergR.MiddenC.MeijndersA.McCalleyT. (2009). Prevention, adaptation, and threat denial: Flooding experiences in the Netherlands. Risk Analysis, 29, 1759-1778.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
