• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >The Risk Perception Paradox-Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards
【24h】

The Risk Perception Paradox-Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards

机译：风险感知悖论对自然灾害的治理和沟通的启示

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article reviews the main insights from selected literature on risk perception, particularly in connection with natural hazards. It includes numerous case studies on perception and social behavior dealing with floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, wild fires, and landslides. The review reveals that personal experience of a natural hazard and trust-or lack of trust-in authorities and experts have the most substantial impact on risk perception. Cultural and individual factors such as media coverage, age, gender, education, income, social status, and others do not play such an important role but act as mediators or amplifiers of the main causal connections between experience, trust, perception, and preparedness to take protective actions. When analyzing the factors of experience and trust on risk perception and on the likeliness of individuals to take preparedness action, the review found that a risk perception paradox exists in that it is assumed that high risk perception will lead to personal preparedness and, in the next step, to risk mitigation behavior. However, this is not necessarily true. In fact, the opposite can occur if individuals with high risk perception still choose not to personally prepare themselves in the face of a natural hazard. Therefore, based on the results of the review, this article offers three explanations suggesting why this paradox might occur. These findings have implications for future risk governance and communication as well as for the willingness of individuals to invest in risk preparedness or risk mitigation actions.
机译：本文回顾了精选文献中关于风险感知的主要见解，尤其是与自然灾害有关的感知。它包括许多有关洪水，干旱，地震，火山喷发，野火和山体滑坡的看法和社会行为的案例研究。审查显示，个人经历自然灾害和信任-或缺乏信任的权威和专家对风险感知的影响最大。文化和个人因素（例如媒体报道，年龄，性别，教育程度，收入，社会地位等）并未发挥如此重要的作用，而是充当经验，信任，知觉和对……的准备之间的主要因果关系的中介者或扩大者。采取保护措施。在分析风险认知和个人采取防范措施的可能性方面的经验和信任因素时，该审查发现存在风险认知悖论，因为人们认为高风险认知会导致个人防范，接下来步骤，采取缓解风险措施。但是，这不一定是正确的。实际上，如果具有高风​​险意识的人仍然选择不面对自然灾害亲自做好准备，则可能发生相反的情况。因此，基于审查的结果，本文提供了三种解释，提示了为什么可能会出现这种悖论。这些发现对未来的风险治理和沟通以及个人投资于风险防范或风险缓解行动的意愿都有影响。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Risk analysis》 |2013年第6期|1049-1065|共17页
  • 作者

    Gisela Wachinger; Ortwin Renn; Chloe Begg; Christian Kuhlicke;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Social Sciences V: Environmental Sociology and Technology Assessment, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart,Germany;

    Department of Social Sciences V: Environmental Sociology and Technology Assessment, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart,Germany,Address correspondence to Ortwin Renn;

    Department Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany;

    Department Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Literature review; natural hazards; risk perception;

    机译：文献评论;自然危害;风险感知;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号