Risk perception, policy efficacy, and policy support in earthquake risk management: Empirical insights from South Korea

被引:0
|
作者
Li, Wen Ya [1 ]
Paudel, Tulsi [2 ]
机构
[1] Cheng Shiu Univ, Dept Tourism & Recreat, Kaohsiung 833301, Taiwan
[2] Sanming Univ, Entrepreneurial Management Coll, Sanming 365004, Fujian, Peoples R China
关键词
Risk management; Earthquake; South Korea; Risk perception; Efficacy; Policy support; Emergency; PLANNED BEHAVIOR; PRIOR EXPERIENCE; PREPAREDNESS; COMMUNICATION; CITIZENS; BELIEFS; HAZARD; SELF;
D O I
10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100349
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This study examines the perception of South Korean citizens regarding earthquake risk, their understanding of earthquake management policies, and their evaluation of such policies. The structural relationship between earthquake risk perception, policy efficacy (which is the general audience's understanding of the policy and willingness to participate), and policy support was investigated while exploring the moderating effect of past earthquake experiences. The survey was conducted among 330 South Korean individuals. The responses were analysed using statistical tools such as confirmatory factor analysis, structural equation modelling, and multigroup analysis. The study revealed that an individual's earthquake risk perception significantly impacts policy efficacy but is unlikely to directly influence policy support. The findings also suggest that individuals who have experienced seismic shockwaves are more likely to perceive earthquake risk and understand earthquake risk mitigation policies. However, an individual's earthquake experience does not significantly impact the relationship between risk perception and policy support. This study's findings have implications for understanding the relationship between earthquake risk perception, policy efficacy, and support, as well as for developing effective earthquake risk management strategies in South Korea.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Insights on Chemical and Natech Risk Management in Japan and South Korea: A Review of Current Practices
    Hyejeong Park
    Ana Maria Cruz
    International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2022, 13 : 359 - 371
  • [32] Computational Framework to Support Government Policy-Making for Hurricane Risk Management
    Wang, Dong
    Davidson, Rachel A.
    Nozick, Linda K.
    Trainor, Joseph E.
    Kruse, Jamie L.
    NATURAL HAZARDS REVIEW, 2020, 21 (01)
  • [33] Policy Support and Its Influencing Factors: Analysis on International Development Policy in the United States and South Korea
    Choi, Changyong
    Kim, Eunju
    KOREA OBSERVER, 2024, 55 (03) : 379 - 407
  • [34] Risk management and perception of low probability risks: A field study on earthquake risk
    Ozdemir, Ozlem
    Yilmaz, Cengiz
    IKTISAT ISLETME VE FINANS, 2010, 25 (295): : 47 - 71
  • [35] Guest editors' introduction: risk perception, policy, and democracy
    Okrent, D
    Pidgeon, N
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2001, 72 (02) : 113 - 114
  • [36] Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategies: The Evolution of Risk Management Policy
    Hollingsworth, Kristen
    Toscani, Michael
    POPULATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT, 2013, 16 (02) : 132 - 137
  • [37] Public R&D Risk and Risk Management Policy
    Lee, Youngseok
    Chung, Dongjin
    Kim, Youngjin
    PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL 25, 2007, 25 : 352 - 355
  • [38] Central Bank Policy and the concentration of risk: Empirical estimates
    Coimbra, Nuno
    Kim, Daisoon
    Rey, Helene
    JOURNAL OF MONETARY ECONOMICS, 2022, 125 : 182 - 198
  • [39] The role of risk perception and affect in predicting support for conservation policy under rapid ecosystem change
    St John, Freya A. V.
    Mason, Tom H. E.
    Bunnefeld, Nils
    CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2021, 3 (02)
  • [40] The Influence of Specific Risk Perceptions on Public Policy Support: An Examination of Energy Policy
    Stoutenborough, James W.
    Vedlitz, Arnold
    Liu, Xinsheng
    ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, 2015, 658 (01): : 102 - 120