Threat, coping and flood prevention – A meta-analysis

Implementation of property‐level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures: Choices and decisions

“…At the same time, their results provide examples of the current limitations of published studies, especially in terms of the high heterogeneity in effect sizes. Interestingly, Bamberg et al () and Van Valkengoed and Steg () only partly support the roles of past flood experiences in the development of adaptive behavior among individuals. The results of the meta‐analysis showed that experiences on previous flood events are positively associated with adaptive behavior, but the results are nonsignificant‐to‐small in terms of their effect on the general heterogeneity among literature.…”

“…Many variables have a bidirectional effect (positively/negatively or strong vs. weak correlated) in evaluating the personal adaptive behavior (Koerth et al, 2017). Some explanation for this challenge might include the small sampling of variables used in past studies, small sampling size, misinterpretation of correlation, failure control before and after a flood hazard event, missing of longitudinal research, or correlation being positive, but very small (Bamberg et al, 2017;Koerth et al, 2017;Van Valkengoed & Steg, 2019;Weinstein, Rothman, & Nicolich, 1998). In fact, the effects of each factor on individual behavior are quite complex and sometimes hazardous; trigger mechanism are often case study specific as different sociocultural and individual circumstances influence individual behaviors (Bubeck et al, 2018;Fuchs, Röthlisberger, Thaler, Zischg, & Keiler, 2017;Kellens, Zaalberg, Neutens, Vanneuville, & De Maeyer, 2011;Logan, Guikema, & Bricker, 2018;Molua, 2009;Poussing, Botzen, & Aerts, 2014).…”

Potential Linkages Between Social Capital, Flood Risk Perceptions, and Self-Efficacy

“…An example of which is ecosystembased adaptation (EbA) strategies; these are called for as part of the Sendai Framework due to an ability to provide a range of benefits next to flood protection (Nguyen et al 2017). Previous research has explored the factors that promote the use of these measures, and a significant number of studies has used the Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) as a theoretical foundation (Bubeck et al 2012;Bamberg et al 2017; van Valkengoed and Steg 2019). Protection Motivation Theory aims to capture the cognitive process of individuals when faced with risky outcomes.…”

Living Well in Times of Threat: The Importance of Adjustment Processes to Explain Functional Adaptation to Uncertain Security in Expatriates Deployed in the Sudan

“…This renders security incidents most similar to earthquakes, since residents know about the risk when living on fault lines and preparation is crucial. The experience of an earthquake increases the salience of threat but does not elevate preparation in general (Greer, Wu, & Murphy, ), a finding that is mirrored in many other studies (Bamberg et al., ; Huang et al., ; Mccaffrey, Wilson, & Konar, ). The population's experience of negative events that occurred and had no or only a small impact (i.e., near misses) could result in the assumption, held by the individuals affected, of resilience and sufficient preparation that actually decreases preparation (Dillon, Tinsley, & Burns, ).…”

“…Importantly, the search for and reliance on risk‐defusing operators is in line with the protective action decision model, which posits that protective behavior in the face of environmental hazards is dependent on risk perception (i.e., the identification of a threat), the appraisal of the threat's personal significance, and the availability and utility of protective actions (Lindell & Perry, ). Reviews focusing on adjustment to earthquakes (Lindell & Perry, ), hurricanes (Huang, Lindell, & Prater, ), and flooding (Bamberg, Masson, Brewitt, & Nemetschek, ) support these assumptions.…”