This paper examines how demographic characteristics of California residents and their sources of information combine to predict earthquake preparedness and hazard mitigation. Telephone interviews were conducted in English or Spanish in 2008 with a sample of 2,081 California households selected by random-digit-dialing, supplemented with random sampling from geographic areas with higher proportions of Blacks/African Americans. Home ownership and higher income result in both more preparedness and more access to information. Although renters have equal access to most sources of information they are less likely than owners to have stockpiled supplies, invested in planning or nonstructural mitigation, or to know what to do during an earthquake. Insurance representatives and employers influenced more preparedness and hazard mitigation than groups that focus on increasing earthquake preparedness. The exception is the California Volunteers, who are the only group that has influenced preparedness by Spanishspeaking Hispanic immigrant populations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), 2009. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, 6th Edition, AAPOR, Lenexa, KS.
2.
BarnumD.HarmsenS.KalkanE.PetersenM. and WillsC.2008. Earthquake Shaking Potential, Map Sheet 48 (Revised 2008), California Geological Survey, Sacramento, CA.
3.
BourqueL. B.MiletiD. S.KanoM. and WoodM. M., 2012. Who prepares for terrorism?, Environment and Behavior44, 374–409.
4.
BourqueL. B.ReganR.KelleyM. M.WoodM. M.KanoM. and MiletiD. S., 2013. An examination of the effect of perceived risk on preparedness behavior, Environment and Behavior45, 615–649.
5.
ChenR.BranumD. M. and WillsC. J., 2013. Annualized and scenario earthquake loss estimations for California, Earthquake Spectra29, 1183–1207.
6.
DashN. and GladwinH., 2007. Evacuation decision-making and behavioral responses: Individual and household, Natural Hazards Review8, 69–77.
7.
GrothmannT. and ReusswigF., 2006. People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take precautionary action while others do not, Natural Hazards38, 101–120.
8.
HellerK.AlexanderD. B. and GatzM.KnightB. G. and RoseT., 2005. Social and personal factors as predictors of earthquake preparation: The role of support provision, network discussion, negative affect, age and education, Journal of Applied Social Psychology35, 399–422.
9.
JacksonE. L., 1981. Response to earthquake hazard: The west coast of America, Environment and Behavior13, 387–416.
KelleyM. M.WoodM. M.KanoM. and BourqueL. B., 2012. Designing more effective public education campaigns: Influences of sociodemographics, environment, and communication on disaster preparedness, Working paper, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles.
12.
LeeJ. E. C. and LemyreL., 2009. A social-cognitive perspective of terrorism risk perception and individual response in Canada, Risk Analysis29, 1265–1280.
13.
LeeS.BrownE.GrantD.BelinT. and BrickJ., 2009. Exploring nonresponse bias in a health survey using neighborhood characteristics, American Journal of Public Health99, 1811–1817.
14.
LindellM. K., 2013. North American Cities at Risk: Household responses to environmental hazards, in Cities at Risk: Living with Perils in the 21st Century, RossettoT., JoffeH. and AdamsJ. (editors), Springer, Dordrecht, 109–130.
15.
LindellM. K. and HwangS. N., 2008. Households’ perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment, Risk Analysis28, 461–501.
16.
LindellM. K. and PerryR. W., 2000. Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: A review of research, Environment and Behavior32, 461–501.
17.
LindellM. K. and PraterC. S., 2000. Household adoption of seismic hazard adjustments: A comparison of residents in two states, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters18, 317–338.
18.
LindellM. K. and LuJ. C. and PraterC. S., 2005. Household decision making and evacuation in response to Hurricane Lili, Natural Hazards Review6, 171–179.
19.
LindellM. K. and WhitneyD. J., 2000. Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption, Risk Analysis20, 13–25.
20.
LindellM. K.ArlikattiS. and PraterC. S., 2009. Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: Perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes, Risk Analysis29, 1072–1088.
21.
MiletiD. S. and BeckE. M., 1975. Communication in crisis: Explaining evacuation symbolically, Communication Research2, 24–49.
22.
MiletiD. S. and DarlingtonJ. D., 1997. The role of searching in shaping reactions to earthquake risk information, Social Problems44, 89–103.
23.
MiletiD. S. and FitzpatrickC., 1992. The causal sequence of risk communication in the Parkfield earthquake prediction experiment, Risk Analysis12, 393–400.
24.
MiletiD. S. and O'BrienP. W., 1992. Warnings during disaster: Normalizing communicated risk, Social Problems39, 40–57.
25.
MiletiD. S. and PeekL., 2000. The social psychology of public response to warnings of a nuclear power plant accident, Journal of Hazardous Materials75, 181–194.
26.
NguyenL. HShenH.ErshoffD.AfifiA. A. and BourqL. B., 2006. Exploring the causal relationship between exposure to the 1994 Northridge earthquake and pre- and postearthquake preparedness activities, Earthquake Spectra22, 569–587.
27.
OzdemirO. and YilmazC., 2011. Factors affecting risk mitigation revisited: the case of earthquake in Turkey, Journal of Risk Research14, 17–46.
28.
PalmR. I.HodgsonM. E.BlanchardR. D. and LyonsD. I., 1990. Earthquake Insurance in California: Environmental Policy and Individual Decision-Making, Westview Press, Inc., Boulder, CO.
29.
QuarantelliE. L., 1990. The warning process and evacuation behavior: The research evidence, University of Delaware Disaster Research Center, Preliminary Paper #148, available at http://udspace.udel.edu/handle/19716/520.
30.
RussellL.GoltzJ. and BourqueL., 1995. Preparedness and hazard mitigation actions before and after two earthquakes, Environment and Behavior27, 744–770.
31.
SatoA., 2011. Changes in Household Hazard Adjustment in Los Angeles County over the Past Four Decades, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
32.
SiegelJ. M.ShoafK.AfifiA. A. and BourqueL. B., 2003. Surviving two disasters: Does reaction to the first predict response to the second?, Environment and Behavior35, 637–654.
33.
SpittalM. J.McClureJ.SiegertR. J. and WalkeyF. H., 2008. Predictors of two types of earthquake preparation: Survival activities and mitigation activities, Environment and Behavior40, 798–817.
34.
Tekeli-YeşilS.DedeogluN.Braun-FahrlaenderC. and TannerM., 2010. Factors motivation individuals to take precautionary action for an expected earthquake in Istanbul, Risk Analysis30, 1181–1195.
35.
TurnerR. H.NiggJ. N and Heller PazD., 1986. Waiting for Disaster, Earthquake Watch in California, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA.
36.
WoodM. M.MiletiD. S.KanoM.ReganR.KelleyM. M. and BourqueL. B., 2012. Communicating actionable risk for terrorism and other hazards, Risk Analysis32, 601–615.
