4.4 Article

Landslide risk perception and communication for disaster risk management in mountain areas of developing countries: a Mexican foretaste

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOUNTAIN SCIENCE
卷 13, 期 12, 页码 2079-2093

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11629-015-3823-0

关键词

Risk perception; Risk communication; Landslides; Disaster risk; Mountain areas

资金

  1. CONACyT [156242]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increasing impact of disasters at local, national, regional and global scales in recent decades has provided enough evidence to urgently direct attention towards the necessity of disaster risk reduction and management, and this requires knowledge. Knowledge without communication is barren, and to communicate the risk of disaster it is necessary to understand the perception of the people at risk. In particular, this paper deals with the necessity to delineate strategies of risk communication in pursuance of risk knowledge as a core of disaster risk reduction and management, especially in mountain areas of developing countries. To portray this issue, an analysis of landslide risk perception in terms of experience, landslide risk awareness, exposure, preparedness, and risk communication and trust was undertaken in the municipality of Teziutlan, Puebla, Mexico, an area that has been affected for several decades by episodes of mass movement. Analysis of the responses to a risk perception questionnaire has offered valuable insights in terms of the information and knowledge most required by the people living in the area of interest, in order to devise a realistic and functional strategy to communicate the risk of a landslide disaster. This includes better understanding of controlling factors and drivers of this risk, and the establishment of potential trusted sources of risk communication. Beyond considering practical matters of risk assessment and management, risk perception and communication can increase the resilience of vulnerable people, and can enhance capacity building for present and future generations.

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

4.4
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