Valuing the reduction of floods: Public officials’ versus citizens’ preferences

Spegel, Elin

doi:10.1016/j.crm.2017.08.003

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our participants are also willing to pay substantial amounts for reducing the risk that a landslide would cause harmful substances to be spread to the environment via the water, air and soil and to avoid negative impacts on societal services. Damages on infrastructure is thus considered the least important, which is consistent with the findings of Spegel (2017), who analyze the preferences for the impacts of floods in the same region.…”

Section: Marginal Willingness To Paysupporting

confidence: 82%

Valuing the Impacts of Landslides: A Choice Experiment Approach

Spegel

2021

EconDisCliCha

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes the preferences for reducing the negative impacts of landslides. Negative consequences of landslides include impacts on transport infrastructure, humans, the environment and important societal services. We apply a choice experiment. The analysis is based on 6048 observations from 504 participants in a web panel. The overall finding is that reducing the risk of landslides would have a positive impact on individuals’ utility, and that individuals prioritize preventing negative consequences on human health and safety over maintaining societal services, environmental status, and preventing damages to transport infrastructure, which seems to be least pressing. Results indicate that prioritizations of citizens differ from the prioritizations of public authorities, whose risk assessment model for evaluating the consequences of landslides gives equal weight to the different impacts.

show abstract

Section: Marginal Willingness To Paysupporting

confidence: 82%

Valuing the Impacts of Landslides: A Choice Experiment Approach

Spegel

2021

EconDisCliCha

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have highlighted the impact of knowledge of risk perception in different groups (Wang and Hu 2014;Spegel 2017;Hartmann et al 2018). In the present study, we also observed that the lack of knowledge leads to insufficient attention to specialized advanced technologies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As previously mentioned, the cognition of experts is considered from the national perspective and serves national macro-policies, while local experts directly serve local authorities based on their actual work experience in the region (Wang and Hu 2014;Spegel 2017;Cabini et al 2018). Therefore, the difference in the social role may result in some cognitive differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study field covers different types of risk events, including natural disasters (such as floods, earthquakes and volcanic disasters), food safety, aircraft, land use, biotechnology, forest landscapes, marine reserves, etc. (Siegrist and Gutscher 2006;Spegel 2017;Gao et al 2013;Dominey-Howes and Minos-Minopoulos 2004;Siegrist et al 2017;Savadori et al 2004;Cabini et al 2018;Hartmann et al 2018;Rogers 2013). Current research mainly focuses on the risk perception differences between the public and experts and the public and administrators.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The gap between local managers and lay people are related to the knowledge gap and social roles. Local managers usually have more knowledge about risk-related issues and are more concerned about the most visible and obvious issues that somehow reflect their function as local administrators (Gao et al 2013;Spegel 2017;Cabini et al 2018). In recent years, some experts have emphasized the role of parallel communication in risk communication.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perceptions of earthquake emergency response and rescue in China: a comparison between experts and local practitioners

Deng

Gao

et al. 2019

Nat Hazards

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By using a questionnaire survey and performing a case study in the Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, this study examined the similarities and differences between the perceptions of local practitioners and the perceptions of experts regarding the priority of the factors affecting earthquake emergency response and rescue at the county level in China. The results show that the perceptions of the most and the least important factors are similar between the two groups, except for the factors that affect special abilities. However, one first-level factor, i.e., environmental conditions, and 16 second-level factors, e.g., influence of ethnic cultures, professional rescue teams, GDP level and historical earthquake disaster experience, significantly differed. The local realities of the natural geography, socioeconomic conditions (e.g., economic level, education and ethnic), earthquake experiences and knowledge form the perception of local practitioners, whereas the experts' perceptions are more consistent with their social role, emergency experiences and knowledge, especially in disaster-prone areas, influencing the differences between the two groups. Suggestions regarding the incorporation local perceptions into the development of local emergency capabilities rather than merely following the perception of experts are discussed.

show abstract