Facilitating Community Participation in Disaster Risk Management: Risk Perception and Preparedness Behaviours in Turkey

Chapter
Part of the Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research book series (NTHR, volume 33)

Abstract

This chapter aims to present a brief review of disasters and the disaster management system in Turkey, followed by a presentation and evaluation of some psychological models developed for explaining individual disaster preparedness behaviours. The models all stress the importance of facilitating awareness of risks, having information about methods to combat hazard (i.e. what to do) and the role of resources in predicting preparedness behaviours. Also highlighted are the significance of evaluations of coping choices, the perceived efficacy and cost of these choices and the availability of personal (e.g. education; self-efficacy), social (e.g. availability of social networks; civil society organisations dealing with particular hazards) and economic (e.g. financial resources; availability of long term credits) resources. Additionally, some factors that hinder preparedness behaviours, such as helplessness, fatalism, denial and externalisation of responsibility (i.e. belief that mitigation and preparedness is the responsibility of local or central government institutions) are presented. The chapter reports findings from studies on individual and community training and involvement in disaster risk management and predictors of hazard adjustment behaviours in Turkey (mostly conducted in Istanbul). It offers suggestions for community training programmes that aim to facilitate mitigation and preparedness behaviours in individuals and communities.

Keywords

Community Member Risk Perception Optimistic Bias Future Earthquake Disaster Risk Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Basolo V, Steinberg LJ, Burby RJ, Levine J, Cruz AM, Huang C (2010) The effects of confidence in government and information on perceived and actual preparedness for disasters. Environ Behav 41(3):338–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruneau M (2002) Building damage from the Marmara, Turkey earthquake of August 17. J Seismol 6(3):357–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burningham KJ, Fielding J, Thrush D (2008) It’ll never happen to me: understanding public awareness of local flood risk. Disasters 32(2):216–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Doğal Afet Sigortaları Kurumu (2012) Natural Insurance Authority. http://www.dask.gov.tr/. Accessed 10 May 2012
  5. Eraybar K, Okazaki K, Ilki A (2010) An exploratory study on perceptions of seismic risk and mitigation in two districts of Istanbul. Disasters 34(1):71–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gülkan P (2009) Disaster management and mitigation systems: a (limited) global picture. In: Gülkan P, Başbuğ Erkan B (eds) Perspectives in disaster management. METU Press, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  7. Gülkan P, Karanci AN (2012) Grassroots participation vs. dictated partnership: anatomy of the Turkish risk management reality. In: Haque CE, Etkin D (eds) Disaster risk and vulnerability: mitigation through mobilizing communities and partnerships. McGill University Press, Montreal, pp 137–153Google Scholar
  8. Gungormus Z, Karabulutlu EY, Yıldız E (2012) Determining the knowledge and behavior of the individuals about earthquake preparedness at home in Turkey. HealthMED 6(1):232–237Google Scholar
  9. Harma M, Salman S, Aktan T, Elgin VM Karanci NA (2009) Deprem Riski Algısı Zarar Azaltma Davranışlarını Garanti Eder Mi? (Does earthquake risk perception guarantee mitigation behaviours?). Paper presented at the 11th round table meeting, DMC, METU, Ankara, 2009Google Scholar
  10. Inelmen K, Say AI, Kabasakal H (2004) Participation lethargy in disaster preparedness organizations within the framework of Turkish CBO. Int J Social Soc Policy 24(10):130–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ISMEP (2012) Istanbul seismic risk mitigation and emergency preparedness project. http://www.guvenliyasam.org/en/. Accessed 10 May 2012
  12. JİCA (2004) Country strategy for natural disasters in Turkey. JICA, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnston DM, Karanci AN, Arikan M, Hopkins DC (2006) Residential retrofitting in Istanbul, Turkey: social and economic considerations. Paper presented at EERI conference, San Francisco, 2006Google Scholar
  14. Karanci NA, Aksit B (2000) Building disaster resistant communities: lessons learned from past earthquakes in Turkey and suggestions for the future. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 18(3):403–416Google Scholar
  15. Karanci NA, Aksit B, Dirik G (2005) Impact of a community disaster awareness training program in Turkey: does it influence hazard related cognitions and preparedness behaviors? Soc Behav Personal 33(3):243–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kasapoglu A, Ecevit M (2003) Impact of the 1999 East Marmara earthquake in Turkey. Popul Environ 24(4):339–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindell MK, Perry RV (1992) Behavioral foundations of community emergency planning. Hemisphere Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Lindell MK, Prater CS (2002) Risk area residents’ perceptions and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. J Appl Soc Psychol 32(11):2377–2392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McClure J, Allen MW, Walkey F (2001) Countering fatalism: causal information in news reports affects judgments about earthquake damage. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 23(2):109–121Google Scholar
  20. Mishra S, Suar D, Paton D (2009) Is externality a mediator of experience-behaviour and information-action hypothesis in disaster preparedness? J Pac Rim Psychol 3(1):11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mulilis JP, Duval TS (1995) Negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: a person-relative to event (PrE) model of coping with threat. J Appl Soc Psychol 25(15):1319–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mulilis JP, Duval TS (1997) The PrE model of coping and tornado preparedness: moderating effects of responsibility. J Appl Soc Psychol 27(19):1750–1766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neigbourhood Disaster Support Project (2012) http://www.mag.org.tr/eng/mag.html. Accessed 10 May 2012
  24. Okman-Fişek G, Kabasakal H (2008) 1999 Marmara Depreminin Yansımaları: Afet ve Insan (Reflections of the 1999 Marmara earthquake: disaster and individual). Boğaziçi Üniversitesi yayınları, İstanbulGoogle Scholar
  25. Parsons T, Toda S, Stein R, Barka A, Dieterich J (2000) Heightened odds of large earthquakes in Istanbul: an interaction-based probability calculation. Science 288(5466):661–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paton D (2008) Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: how trust influences its effectiveness. Int J Global Environ Issue 8(1):2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paton D, Smith L, Johnston D (2005) When good intentions turn bad: promoting natural hazard preparedness. Aust J Emerg Manag 20(1):25–30Google Scholar
  28. Pearce L (2003) Disaster management and community planning, and public participation: how to achieve sustainable hazard mitigation. Nat Hazard 28(2–3):211–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peek LA, Mileti DS (2002) The history and future of disaster research. In: Bechtel RB, Churchman A (eds) Handbook of environmental psychology. Wiley, New York, pp 511–524Google Scholar
  30. Prime Ministry Disaster and Emergency Presidency (2012) Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry Disasters and Emergency Presidency. http://www.afetacil.gov.tr/Ingilizce_Site/index.html. Accessed 10 May 2012
  31. Rogers RW (1983) Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. In: Caciopppo BL, Petty LL (eds) Social psychophysiology: a sourcebook. Guildford, London, pp 153–176Google Scholar
  32. Rustemli A, Karanci NA (1999) Correlates of earthquake cognitions and preparedness behaviors in a victimized population. J Soc Psychol 139(1):91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sattler DN, Kaiser CF, Hittner JB (2000) Disaster preparedness: relationships among prior experience, personal characteristics, and distress. J Appl Soc Psychol 30(7):1396–1420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Solberg C, Rossetto T, Joffe H (2010) The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 10(8):1663–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. TC Başbakanlık PUB (2005) İstanbul’da Seçilmiş Konutların Takviye edilmesine Yönelik Fizibilite Çalışması Müşavirlik Hizmetleri Sosyal Etki Raporu (İstanbul Feasibility study for retrofitting selected residential buildings in Istanbul [Bakırköy District] Social feasibility Report), IstanbulGoogle Scholar
  36. Tekeli-Yeşil S, Dedeoğlu N, Tanner M, Braun-Fahrlaender C, Obrist B (2010) Individual preparedness and mitigation actions for a predicted earthquake in Istanbul. Disasters 34(4):910–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. TUIK (2009) Turkish Statistical Institute Population Statistics and Projections. http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do?tb_id=39&ust_id=11. Accessed 29 Mar 2011
  38. Turkish Red Crescent (2012) http://www.kizilay.org.tr/egitimhizmetleri. Accessed 10 May 2012
  39. Türkiye Ulusal Afet Arşivi (2012) Turkish national disaster archive. http://www.afet.gov.tr/tuaa/PortalPage/. Accessed 10 May 2012

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations