4.6 Article

Differences in disaster preparedness between urban and rural communities in China

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.102020

Keywords

Disaster preparedness; Urban-rural difference; China

Funding

  1. National Social Science Fund of China [18BSH068]
  2. National High-think Tank Key Program [Gb2020001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are significant differences in disaster preparedness between urban and rural households, mainly influenced by socioeconomic factors such as education, income, and social status. Community activities can encourage individuals to engage in preparedness activities, and interventions focusing on low socioeconomic status households may be needed to improve their disaster preparedness.
Pre-disaster mitigation and preparedness activities are necessary to reduce vulnerability in a society and to protect people whenever disasters occur. Although disaster preparedness and protective behaviors have attracted scholars worldwide, there has been little investigation into the differences between the preparedness of rural and urban households. This study examines the associations of various influencing factors with household disaster preparedness in urban and rural China, where urban-rural differences remain substantial in spite of rapid economic growth. Data from a large area affected by the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake were used. Results from linear regression models showed that the urban-rural differences in disaster preparedness were mainly explained by the socioeconomic factors, such as education, income, and social status (being a CCP member). Community activities intended to reduce the risk of disaster can also encourage an individual to carry out preparedness activities. Interventions may be needed to focus on low socioeconomic status households to improve their disaster preparedness. Community activities may serve as an important approach to design interventions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available