Skip to main content
Log in

Earthquake awareness and perception of risk among the residents of Istanbul

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Awareness and perception of risk are among the most crucial steps in the process of taking precautions at individual level for various hazards. In this study, we investigated the factors affecting better knowledge and greater risk perception about earthquakes among residents of Istanbul. A field survey was carried out, and a total of 1,123 people were interviewed in two districts of Istanbul with different seismic risk levels and from three (low, moderate and high) socio-economic levels (SEL). The findings showed that although the level of knowledge regarding earthquakes and preparedness for them was promising, it could be improved. The results indicated that future preparedness programmes should target people with lower educational and socio-economic levels. The media were the leading source of information among the respondents. Location of the home was a strong influence on individuals having above average earthquake knowledge and even more on high risk perception. Socio-economic parameters (educational level, economic status, SEL of the sub-district and tenure of the home), gender and attitude score were other factors influencing greater risk perception with regard to earthquakes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Only in the Adalar district is the intensity expected to be higher (9.0–10.0) than in Bakırköy. This district was not considered during the selection as it is composed of small islands in the Marmara Sea that are mainly occupied during the summer.

  2. The question is taken from a test applied to the participants in a disaster preparedness education programme conducted by the Disaster Preparedness Education Unit of Boğaziçi University Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute.

References

  • Armaş I (2008) Social vulnerability and seismic risk perception. Case study: the historic center of the Bucharest Municipality/Romania. Nat Hazards 47(3):397–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BU (2003) Earthquake risk assessment for the Istanbul metropolitan area final report. Boğaziçi University Press, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Burningham K, Fielding J, Thrush D (2008) ‘It’ll never happen to me’: understanding public awareness of local flood risk. Disasters 32(2):216–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CDO (2009) Deprem ile yasamayi ogrenmeliyiz—We have to learn living with earthquakes. Sivil Savunma Genel Mudurlugu—Civil Defence General Directorate. Available: http://www.ssgm.gov.tr/indir/pdf/bro_deprem.pdf. Accessed 10.03.2008 2008

  • Davis MS, Ricci T, Mitchell LM (2005) Perceptions of risk for volcanic hazards at Versuvio and Etna, Italy. Australasian J Disaster Trauma Studies 2005–2001

  • Dedeoğlu N (2006) Knowledge, attitude and practice of residents of Antalya, Turkey about earthquake preparedness. In: International disaster reduction conference, 27 August–1 September 2006, Davos, Switzerland

  • Dedeoğlu N (2008) Role of the turkish news media in disaster preparedness 2008

  • EM-DAT (2009) The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database. Université catholique de Louvain—Brussels—Belgium. Available www.emdat.be. Accessed 26 August 2009

  • Fişek O, Yeniçeri N, Müderrisoğlu S, Özkarar G (2003) Integrated decision support systems for disaster management in Turkey: Final report of the psychosocial model. Boğaziçi University, CENDIM, Bebek

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho M-C, Shaw D, Lin S, Chiu Y-C (2008) How do disaster characteristics influence risk perception? Risk Anal 28(3):635–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurnen F, McClure J (1997) The effect of increased earthquake knowledge on perceived preventability of earthquake damage. Australasian J Disaster Trauma Stud

  • Işeri Say A, İnelmen K, Kabasakal H (2005) Örgütlü Katılım ve Afet Yönetimi Etkileşimi. Öneri 6(23):9–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston DM, Bebbington MS, Lai C, Houghton BF, Paton D (1999) Volcanic hazard perceptions: comparative shifts in knowledge and risk. Disaster Prevent Manage 8(2):118–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalaça S, Aytekin BA, Çalı Ş (2007) Istanbul’da Depreme Karşı Bireysel Düzeyde Önlem Almayı Belirleyen Faktörler. In: 11th National Public Health Congress, 23–26 October 2007, Denizli, Türkiye

  • Kasperson RE, Renn O, Slovic P et al (2000) The social implication of risk: a conceptual framework. In: Slovic P (ed) The perception of risk. Earthscan Publications, London, pp 232–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman DR, Taylor SE (1987) Date with an earthquake: coping with a probable, unpredictable disaster. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 13(4):546–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin S, Shaw D, Ho M-C (2008) Why are flood and landslide victims less willing to take mitigation measures than the public? Nat Hazards 44:305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell MK (1994) Perceived characteristics of environmental hazards. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 12(3):303–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell MK, Prater CS (2000) Household adoption of seismic hazard adjustments: a comparison of residents in two states. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 18(2):317–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell M, Whitney D (2000) Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Anal 20(1):13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mileti DS, Fitzpatrick C (1992) The causal sequence of risk communication in the Parkfield earthquake prediction experiment. Risk Anal 12(3):393–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons T, Toda S, Stein R, Barka A, Dieterich J (2000) Heightened odds of large earthquakes near Istanbul: an interaction-based probability calculation. Science 288(5466):661–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paton D, Millar M, Johnston D (2001) Community resilience to volcanic hazard consequences. Nat Hazards 24(2):157–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S (2000) Rating the risk. In: Slovic P (ed) The perception of risk. Earthscan Publications, London, pp 104–120

  • Solberg C, Rossetto T, Hoffe H (2010) The social psychology of seismic hazard adjustment: re-evaluating the international literature. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10:1663–1677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tekeli-Yeşil S, Dedeoğlu N, Braun-Fahrlaender C, Tanner M (2010a) Factors that motivate people to take precautionary actions for an expected earthquake in Istanbul. Risk Anal 30(8):1181–1195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tekeli-Yeşil S, Dedeoğlu N, Tanner M, Braun-Fahrlaender C, Obrist B (2010b) Individual preparedness and mitigation actions for a predicted earthquake in Istanbul. Disasters 34(4):910–930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein ND (1989) Effects of personal experience on self-protection behaviour. Psychol Bull 105(1):31–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sıdıka Tekeli-Yeşil.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tekeli-Yeşil, S., Dedeoğlu, N., Braun-Fahrlaender, C. et al. Earthquake awareness and perception of risk among the residents of Istanbul. Nat Hazards 59, 427–446 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9764-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9764-1

Keywords

Navigation