Natural Hazards

, Volume 54, Issue 3, pp 765–781

Predicting community earthquake preparedness: a cross-cultural comparison of Japan and New Zealand

  • Douglas Paton
  • Robert Bajek
  • Norio Okada
  • David McIvor
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper reports on a study investigating cross-cultural equivalence in predictors of earthquake preparedness. Data were collected from Napier (New Zealand) and Kyoto (Japan). These locations were selected because they face comparable levels of seismic risk but differ with respect to their cultural characteristics. This mix of hazard similarity and cultural differences provided an opportunity to assess the degree of cross-cultural equivalence in predictors of earthquake preparedness. Cross-cultural equivalence was examined by assessing the degree to which individual hazard beliefs (outcome expectancies) and social characteristics (community participation, collective efficacy, empowerment, trust) could explain levels of hazard preparedness in each location. Structural equation modelling analyses revealed similarity in the pattern of relationships between predictor variables and intention prepare in the Napier and Kyoto data. It is argued that this provides support for the existence of some universal, cross-cultural equivalence in how hazard beliefs and social characteristics interact to predict the degree to which people adopt earthquake preparedness measures. Differences between the data sets are discussed in the context of the fundamental cultural differences between Japan and New Zealand. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Keywords

Earthquake Community Culture Preparedness Resilience 

References

  1. Anckermann S, Dominguez M, Sotol N, Kjaerulf F, Berliner P, Mikkelsen EN (2005) Psycho-social support to large numbers of traumatized people in post-conflict societies: an approach to community development in guatemala. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 15:136–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arbuckle JL (2006) Amos 6.0 user’s guide. SPSS, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Bajek R, Matsuda Y, Okada N (2008) Japan’s Jishu-bosai-soshiki community activities: analysis of its role in participatory community disaster risk management. Nat Hazards 44:281–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy and agency of change. Raven Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennet P, Murphy S (1997) Psychology and health promotion. Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  6. Brislin R (2000) Understanding culture’s influence on behaviour. Wadsworth, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  7. Child I (2008) Emergence of new Volunteerism: increasing community resilience to natural disasters in Japan. In: Gow K, Paton D (eds) The phoenix of natural disasters: community resilience. Nova, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener E, Suh EM (2000) Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Duncan TE, Duncan SC, Okut H, Strycker LA, Hix-Small H (2003) A multilevel contextual model of neighbourhood collective efficacy. Am J Community Psychol 32:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duval TS, Mulilis JP (1999) A person-relative-to-event (PrE) approach to negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: a field study. J Appl Soc Psychol 29:495–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Earle TC (2004) Thinking aloud about trust: a protocol analysis of trust in risk management. Risk Anal 24:169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Earle TC, Cvetkovich GT (1995) Social trust: towards a cosmopolitan society. Praeger, WestportGoogle Scholar
  13. Eng E, Parker E (1994) Measuring community competence in the Mississippi Delta: the interface between program evaluation and empowerment. Health Educ Q 21:199–220Google Scholar
  14. Gregg CE, Houghton BF (2006) Natural hazards. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  15. Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  16. Jang L, LaMendola W (2006) The Hakka spirit as a predictor of resilience. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  17. Kee H, Knox RT (1970) Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of trust and suspicion. J Conflict Resolut 14:357–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klein R, Nicholls R, Thomalla F (2003) Resilience to natural hazards: how useful is this concept? Environ Hazard 5:35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2000) Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Anal 20:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lion R, Meertens RM, Bot I (2002) Priorities in information desire about unknown risks. Risk Anal 22:765–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McGee TK, Russell S (2003) “Its just a natural way of life…” an investigation of wildfire preparedness in rural Australia. Environ Hazard 5:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nakano L (2005) Community volunteers in Japan: everyday stories of social change. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Norenzayan A, Heine SJ (2005) Psychological universals: what are they and how can we know? Psychol Bull 131:763–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paton D (2000) Emergency planning: integrating community development, community resilience and hazard mitigation. J Am Soc Prof Emerg Manag 7:109–118Google Scholar
  25. Paton D (2006a) Disaster resilience: building capacity to co-exist with natural hazards and their consequences. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  26. Paton D (2006b) Disaster resilience: integrating individual, community, institutional and environmental perspectives. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  27. Paton D (2008) Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: how trust influences its effectiveness. Int J Glob Environ Issues 8:2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Paton D, Bishop B (1996) Disasters and communities: promoting psychosocial well-being. In: Paton D, Long N (eds) Psychological aspects of disaster: impact, coping, and intervention. Dunmore Press, Palmerston NorthGoogle Scholar
  29. Paton D, Jang L (2010) Disaster resilience: exploring all-hazards and cross cultural perspectives. In: Miller D, Rivera J (eds) Community disaster recovery and resiliency: exploring global opportunities and challenges. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Paton D, Johnston D (2006) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  31. Paton D, Wright L (2008) Preparing for bushfires: the public education challenges facing fire agencies. In: Handmer J, Haynes K (eds) Community bushfire safety. CSIRO Publishing, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  32. Paton D, Smith LM, Johnston D (2005) When good intentions turn bad: promoting natural hazard preparedness. Aust J Emerg Manag 20:25–30Google Scholar
  33. Paton D, McClure J, Bürgelt PT (2006) Natural hazard resilience: the role of individual and household preparedness. In: Paton D, Johnston D (eds) Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  34. Paton D, Bürgelt PT, Prior T (2008a) Living with bushfire risk: social and environmental influences on preparedness. Aust J Emerg Manag 23:41–48Google Scholar
  35. Paton D, Gregg CE, Houghton BF, Lachman R, Lachman J, Johnston DM, Wongbusarakum S (2008b) The impact of the December 26th 2004 tsunami on coastal Thai communities: assessing adaptive capacity. Disasters 32:106–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Poortinga Y (1997) Towards convergence? In: Berry J, Poortinga Y, Pandey J (eds) Theory and method: Vol. 1. Handbook of cross cultural psychology, 2nd edn. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, pp 347–387Google Scholar
  37. Rich RC, Edelstein M, Hallman WK, Wandersman AH (1995) Citizen participation and empowerment: the case of local environmental hazards. Am J Community Psychol 23:657–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20:713–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sjöberg L (1999) Consequences of perceived risk: demand for risk mitigation. J Risk Res 2:129–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Speer PW, Peterson NA (2000) Psychometric properties of an empowerment scale: testing cognitive, emotional and behavioural domains. Soc Work Res 24:109–118Google Scholar
  41. Tatsuki S (2000) The Kobe earthquake and the renaissance of volunteerism in Japan. Kwansei Gakuin Univ Dep Sociol Stud 87:185–196Google Scholar
  42. Tierney KJ, Lindell MK, Perry RW (2001) Facing the unexpected: disaster preparedness in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  43. Triandis HC (1995) Individualism and collectivism. Westview, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  44. Turner RH, Nigg JM, Paz DH (1986) Waiting for disaster: earthquake watch in California. University of California Press, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  45. Zaccaro SJ, Blair V, Peterson C, Zazanis M (1995) Collective efficacy. In: Maddux JE (ed) Self efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: theory, research, and application. Plenum Press, New York, pp 305–328Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Douglas Paton
    • 1
  • Robert Bajek
    • 2
  • Norio Okada
    • 2
  • David McIvor
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PsychologyUniversity of TasmaniaLauncestonAustralia
  2. 2.Research Center for Disaster Reduction Systems, Disaster Prevention Research InstituteKyoto UniversityGokasho, UjiJapan

Personalised recommendations