People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators

Abstract Damage and disruption caused by floods do not just arise from the characteristics of physical structures, but also from the characteristics of residents inhabiting these structures. Social vulnerability analyses typically employ socio‐demographic proxy indicators that do not address the ris...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Philipp Babcicky, Sebastian Seebauer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2021-12-01
Series:Journal of Flood Risk Management
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12752
_version_ 1818840939606573056
author Philipp Babcicky
Sebastian Seebauer
author_facet Philipp Babcicky
Sebastian Seebauer
author_sort Philipp Babcicky
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Damage and disruption caused by floods do not just arise from the characteristics of physical structures, but also from the characteristics of residents inhabiting these structures. Social vulnerability analyses typically employ socio‐demographic proxy indicators that do not address the risk attitudes, beliefs and agency of those living in areas at risk. To close this gap, this article introduces a range of indicators from psychological risk research. Physical, social and psychological indicators are compared for their influence on vulnerability outcomes such as building damage or emotional distress. Based on survey data of 456 Austrian at‐risk households, hierarchical regression models confirm the added value of psychological indicators for measuring vulnerability above and beyond traditional physical and social indicators. Our findings show that psychological indicators are particularly important for explaining health impacts and distress. General intentions for flood preparedness, fear of flooding and self‐efficacy are most relevant. For a more holistic view of vulnerability, measurement instruments should incorporate psychological indicators. Disaggregated household‐level data is necessary to fully capture the variability between households living in the same flood‐prone area. Indicators perform differently depending on the other indicators included, and the considered outcome; therefore, we caution against pooling indicators to composite indices of overall vulnerability.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T04:18:09Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e8f67753cd9a4b5e8295419c95778c78
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1753-318X
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T04:18:09Z
publishDate 2021-12-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Flood Risk Management
spelling doaj.art-e8f67753cd9a4b5e8295419c95778c782022-12-21T20:36:14ZengWileyJournal of Flood Risk Management1753-318X2021-12-01144n/an/a10.1111/jfr3.12752People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicatorsPhilipp Babcicky0Sebastian Seebauer1LIFE—Institute for Climate, Energy and Society JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft Mbh Graz AustriaLIFE—Institute for Climate, Energy and Society JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft Mbh Graz AustriaAbstract Damage and disruption caused by floods do not just arise from the characteristics of physical structures, but also from the characteristics of residents inhabiting these structures. Social vulnerability analyses typically employ socio‐demographic proxy indicators that do not address the risk attitudes, beliefs and agency of those living in areas at risk. To close this gap, this article introduces a range of indicators from psychological risk research. Physical, social and psychological indicators are compared for their influence on vulnerability outcomes such as building damage or emotional distress. Based on survey data of 456 Austrian at‐risk households, hierarchical regression models confirm the added value of psychological indicators for measuring vulnerability above and beyond traditional physical and social indicators. Our findings show that psychological indicators are particularly important for explaining health impacts and distress. General intentions for flood preparedness, fear of flooding and self‐efficacy are most relevant. For a more holistic view of vulnerability, measurement instruments should incorporate psychological indicators. Disaggregated household‐level data is necessary to fully capture the variability between households living in the same flood‐prone area. Indicators perform differently depending on the other indicators included, and the considered outcome; therefore, we caution against pooling indicators to composite indices of overall vulnerability.https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12752coping capacitynatural hazardsresiliencerisk assessmentvulnerability assessment
spellingShingle Philipp Babcicky
Sebastian Seebauer
People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
Journal of Flood Risk Management
coping capacity
natural hazards
resilience
risk assessment
vulnerability assessment
title People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
title_full People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
title_fullStr People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
title_full_unstemmed People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
title_short People, not just places: Expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
title_sort people not just places expanding physical and social vulnerability indices by psychological indicators
topic coping capacity
natural hazards
resilience
risk assessment
vulnerability assessment
url https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12752
work_keys_str_mv AT philippbabcicky peoplenotjustplacesexpandingphysicalandsocialvulnerabilityindicesbypsychologicalindicators
AT sebastianseebauer peoplenotjustplacesexpandingphysicalandsocialvulnerabilityindicesbypsychologicalindicators