Why are flood and landslide victims less willing to take mitigation measures than the public?

By Shuyeu Lin, D. Shaw, M. Ho. 2008

193 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

An Examination of the Effect of Perceived Risk on Preparedness Behavior (2013, background): “, 2008), and within an unspecified future time period (Basolo et al., 2009; Grothmann & Reusswig, 2006; Lin et al., 2008; Siegrist & Gutscher, 2008; Tekeli-Yeşil et al., 2010).”
The effects of trust in government on earthquake survivors’ risk perception and preparedness in China (2017, background): “In the broader Chinese culture context, which is well known for its collectivism, a survey from Taiwan demonstrates that trust (trust in government, expert and media) is a positive predictor of flood and landslides victims’ mitigation intentions (Lin et al. 2007).”
Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research (2013, methodology): “In contrast, reports by Lin et al.((31)) indicated that higher levels of trust or confidence in crisis management and provision of flood warnings (by government, risk experts, and media) increased mitigation intentions, insurance purchase intentions, and information-seeking intentions.”
The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards (2013, background): “(14) In general, trust seems to be directly related to preparedness actions.(56,57,33) When individuals trust in structural and/or governance measures to keep them safe they are less likely to act than when they believe they have no choice but to act (e.”