Household Disaster Preparedness in New York City before Superstorm Sandy: Findings and Recommendations

Abstract

This study focuses on household disaster preparedness in New York City (NYC) prior to Superstorm Sandy occurrence on October 25, 2012. The purpose of our analysis is to explain the level and patterns of disaster preparedness before a relatively rare natural disaster event occurred and to investigate the factors that influenced the capacity of NYC households to prepare for emergencies and disasters. A random telephone (RDD) survey comprised of 2001 NYC residents across all five boroughs was conducted by the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and completed before Sandy struck the City. These data were explored using frequencies, cross-tabs, and factor analysis to build a path model of household disaster preparedness. Findings indicate that household disaster preparedness levels in NYC are high, especially regarding the acquisition of emergency supplies and communication resources. A trust in local government and assistance from one’s social network are the strongest predictors of general household preparedness. Exogenous variables in our model – low income households and those with functional and access needs residents – will be more vulnerable during an actual disaster since they are less able to access communication technologies to search for self-protective disaster information and to communicate their needs during an emergency.

Place attachment, risk perception, and preparedness in a population exposed to coastal hazards: A case study in Faro Beach, southern Portugal

“…Findings on the relationships between risk perception and preparedness for a variety of hazards are varied. Some studies observed that risk perception is associated with preparedness behaviours [60][61][62], whereas others found no effect of risk perception on preparedness [27,63,64], and still other studies suggested that risk perception mediate the effect of variables such as past experience, knowledge, and self-efficacy, on preparedness (see review [65] and references therein). A recent meta-analysis on the influence of several motivational factors on hazard adaptation showed that the strongest predictors of different types of preparedness behaviours were self-efficacy, negative affect, outcome efficacy, and descriptive norms, whereas risk perception was strongly associated with individuals' intention to adapt [66].…”

“…Thus, communication and education campaigns are usually geared at increasing risk perception of individuals and populations at risk, but this strategy may not produce the desired outcomes. First, risk perception may not have a causal effect on preparedness behaviours and may be dependent on the imminence of the threat (Martins et al, 2018). Second, more information may lead to the normalisation of risk, a way of psychologically coping with the threat by decreasing the subjective judgement on the severity of the risk [31].…”

Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020

“…Risk-perception questionnaires were usually targeted at residents or adolescents in disaster-affected areas. For example, Martins studied household disaster preparedness before Storm Sandy among 2001 residents of all five boroughs of New York [ 43 ]. When studying the role of behavioral experience in risk judgment, Halpern investigated 577 adolescents and young adults aged from 10 to 30 years old [ 44 ].…”

Establishing a Toxics Mobility Inventory for Climate Change and Pollution

“…Preparedness and resiliency in the face of extreme weather is influenced by a variety of factors, including: degree of trust in local governments, social and political capital, and access to communication technology before and after weather events. 18 The potential for exposure amongst marginalized populations remains troublesome and prevalent, considering the scant attention local sustainability planning has given to vulnerable communities, 19,20 Texas Sustainability 229…”