4.5 Article

Responding strategically to natural hazards: the role of hazard experience, infrastructure vulnerability, and risk perception in transit agency coordination with stakeholders

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2022.2100246

关键词

natural hazards; transit agency; risk perception; infrastructure vulnerability; interorganizational coordination

资金

  1. Federal Transit Administration, US Department of Transportation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates how public organizations strategically respond to natural hazards, focusing on transit agencies in the US. It explores the impact of contextual factors, such as experience of natural hazards, transit infrastructure conditions, and public managers' risk perceptions, on coordination strategies. The findings shed light on how transit agencies consider service area vulnerabilities and balance organizational capacity, risk, and equity.
How public organizations respond strategically to natural hazards is relevant for maintaining functionality and protecting citizens. An essential component of strategic response is coordinating with multiple organizations in ways that provide resources and mutual support. Drawing from resource dependence and cognitive behavior theories, we investigate how different contextual factors predict coordination strategy. We focus on transit agencies in the US and develop hypotheses about how the experience of natural hazards, the transit infrastructure conditions, and public managers' risk perceptions determine their coordination as responses to immediate and future extreme weather events. This study aims to contribute to the strategic management of natural hazards literature. In particular, we expect that the findings will illuminate how transit agencies consider service area vulnerabilities as part of their strategic coordination efforts. Further, the study will provide insights to managers who are facing the need to balance organizational capacity, risk, and equity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据