Earthquake Readiness and Recovery: An Asia-Pacific Perspective

  • Douglas Paton
  • Li-ju Jang
Part of the Springer Natural Hazards book series (SPRINGERNAT)


People living in countries situated on the circum-Pacific seismic belt (the Pacific Ring of Fire), where some 90% of the world's earthquakes occur, live with high levels of seismic risk. When large earthquakes occur, affected residents are abruptly faced with loss, challenges, and demands that differ significantly from anything they would encounter under normal conditions. The fact that people are not equally affected, and that differential impact and differences in people’s ability to adapt and recover from earthquake events can be attributed in part to people’s level of preparedness or readiness, makes understanding why this is so an important goal in disaster risk reduction. This chapter discusses theoretical analyses of earthquake readiness and empirical studies of earthquake response and recovery in the citizens of two countries situated on the Ring of Fire; New Zealand and Taiwan. By identifying how personal, community, and cultural characteristics interact to influence earthquake readiness, response, and reduction, this chapter offers insights that can inform the development of the risk communication and community outreach programs required to facilitate sustained disaster readiness.


Community Participation Collective Efficacy Disaster Risk Reduction Earthquake Event Social Support Network 
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.


  1. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175–1184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bannister, S., & Gledhill, K. (2012). Evolution of the 2010–2012 Canterbury earthquake sequence. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 55, 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruijn, K. M. D. (2004). Resilience indicators for flood risk management systems of lowland rivers. International Journal of River Basin Management, 2, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Andries, J. M., & Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems, 8, 941–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Disaster Response Report. (2008). Ministry of the interior department of statistics, Taiwan. Accessed 28 Dec, 2008.
  6. Duval, T. S., & Mulilis, J.-P. (1995). A person-relative-to-event (PrE) approach to negative threat appeals and earthquake readiness: A field study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 495–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Farley, J. E. (1998). Down but not out: Earthquake awareness and readiness trends in the St. Louis metropolitan area, 1990–1997. [survey]. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 16, 303–319.Google Scholar
  8. Gaillard, J.-C. (2007). Resilience of traditional societies in facing natural hazards. Disaster Prevention and Management, 16, 522–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (ISDR). (2005). Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. Kobe: International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.Google Scholar
  11. Jang, L. (2008). Natural disasters: Effects of cultural factors on resilience. North Charleston: VDM Verlag Dr Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co KG and Licensors.Google Scholar
  12. Jang, L., & LaMendola, W. (2006). The Hakka spirit as a predictor of resilience. In D. Paton & D. Johnston (Eds.), Disaster resilience: An integrated approach. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  13. Jang, L., & LaMendola, W. (2007). Social work in natural disasters: The case of spirituality and posttraumatic growth. Advances in Social Work, 8, 67–78.Google Scholar
  14. Jordan, D. K. (n.d.) The traditional Chinese family and lineage. Accessed 14 June 2004.
  15. Klein, R., Nicholls, R., & Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept? Environmental Hazards, 5, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lechliter, G. J., & Willis, F. N. (1996). Living with earthquakes: Beliefs and information. The Psychological Record, 46, 391.Google Scholar
  17. Lindell, M. K., Arlikatti, S., & Prater, C. S. (2009). Why people do what they do to protect against earthquakes risk: Perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes. Risk Analysis, 29, 1072–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lindell, M. K., & Hwang, S. N. (2008). Households’ perceived personal risk and responses in a multi-hazard environment. Risk Analysis, 28, 539–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lo, J. C. (2010). The impact of the Chi-Chi earthquake on demographic changes: An event history analysis. In S. Kurosu, T. Bengtsson, & C. Campbell (Eds.), Demographic responses to economic and environmental crises (pp. 193–203). China/Japan: Kashiwa.Google Scholar
  20. Mamula-Seadon, L., Selway, K., & Paton, D. (2012). Exploring resilience: Learning from Christchurch communities. Tephra, 23, 5–7.Google Scholar
  21. McIvor, D., Paton, D., & Johnston, D. M. (2009). Modelling community preparation for natural hazards: Understanding hazard cognitions. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 3, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nathanson, I. (2003). Spirituality and the life cycle. In T. Tirrito & T. Cascio (Eds.), Religious organizations in community services: A social work perspective (pp. 63–77). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategies for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paton, D. (2006a). Disaster resilience: Integrating individual, community, institutional and environmental perspectives. In D. Paton & D. Johnston (Eds.), Disaster resilience: An integrated approach. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  25. Paton, D. (2006b). Disaster resilience: Building capacity to co-exist with natural hazards and their consequences. In D. Paton & D. Johnston (Eds.), Disaster resilience: An integrated approach. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  26. Paton, D. (2008). Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: How trust influences its effectiveness. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 8, 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paton, D. (2012). MCDEM Christchurch community resilience project report. Wellington: Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management.Google Scholar
  28. Paton, D. (2013). Disaster resilient communities: Developing and testing an all-hazards theory. Journal of Integrated Disaster Risk Management, 3, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Paton, D., & Jang, L. (2011). Disaster resilience: Exploring all-hazards and cross cultural perspectives. In D. Miller & J. Rivera (Eds.), Community disaster recovery and resiliency: Exploring global opportunities and challenges. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  30. Paton, D., Johnston, D., Mamula-Seadon, L., & Kenney, C. M. (2014). Recovery and development: Perspectives from New Zealand and Australia. In N. Kapucu & K. T. Liou (Eds.), Disaster and development: Examining global issues and cases. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Paton, D., & McClure, J. (2013). Preparing for disaster: Building household and community capacity. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  32. Paton, D., Smith, L., & Johnston, D. (2005). When good intentions turn bad: Promoting natural hazard readiness. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 20, 25–30.Google Scholar
  33. Pelling, M., & High, C. (2005). Understanding adaptation: What can social capital offer assessment of adaptive capacity? Global Environmental Change, 15, 308–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Russell, L. A., Goltz, J. D., & Bourque, L. B. (1995). Readiness and hazard mitigation actions before and after two earthquakes. Envionmental and Behavior, 27, 744–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  36. Winstanely, A., Cronin, K., & Daly, M. (2011). Supporting communication around the Canterbury earthquakes and other risks. GNS Science Miscellaneous Report 2011/37. 39 p.Google Scholar
  37. Yang, W. S. (2004). A census of the Hakka population in Taiwan. Taipei: Council for Hakka Affairs, Executive Yuan, R. O. C. (in Chinese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Psychological and Clinical SciencesCharles Darwin UniversityDarwinAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Social WorkNational Pingtung University of Science and TechnologyPingtungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations