IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v58y2011i1p269-287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public perception of flood hazard and flood risk in Iceland: a case study in a watershed prone to ice-jam floods

Author

Listed:
  • Emmanuel Pagneux
  • Guðrún Gísladóttir
  • Salvör Jónsdóttir

Abstract

Understanding and improving the public perception has become an important element in the management of flood risk worldwide. In Iceland, studying perception of flood hazard and flood risk is, however, in its early stages. This paper presents a case study on the public perception of flood hazard and flood risk in an Icelandic town prone to ice-jam floods. Awareness of the population regarding historical inundations, self estimation of flood risk and worry is considered. The factual knowledge of the residents is deconstructed in flood hazard parameters accessible to the lay population: number of events, dates, genesis and boundaries. The performance of the respondents is rated for each parameter and the influence of several predictors evaluated. The research shows three significant patterns: there is poor awareness and little worry about historical inundations in the area; experience of the past flooding events in town is the most effective source of knowledge; awareness, risk estimation and worry are not correlated. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Emmanuel Pagneux & Guðrún Gísladóttir & Salvör Jónsdóttir, 2011. "Public perception of flood hazard and flood risk in Iceland: a case study in a watershed prone to ice-jam floods," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 58(1), pages 269-287, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:58:y:2011:i:1:p:269-287
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-010-9665-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-010-9665-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-010-9665-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baruch Fischhoff, 1995. "Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 137-145, April.
    2. P. Keur & H. Henriksen & J. Refsgaard & M. Brugnach & C. Pahl-Wostl & A. Dewulf & H. Buiteveld, 2008. "Identification of Major Sources of Uncertainty in Current IWRM Practice. Illustrated for the Rhine Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(11), pages 1677-1708, November.
    3. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Weiwei Cao & Yi Yang & Jing Huang & Dianchen Sun & Gaofeng Liu, 2020. "Influential Factors Affecting Protective Coping Behaviors of Flood Disaster: A Case Study in Shenzhen, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Pierre Valois & David Bouchard & Denis Talbot & Maxime Caron & Jean-Sébastien Renaud & Pierre Gosselin & Johann Jacob, 2020. "Adoption of flood-related preventive behaviours by people having different risks and histories of flooding," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 102(3), pages 1155-1173, July.
    3. Delin Liu & Mengjie Li & Yue Li & Hao Chen, 2022. "Assessment of Public Flood Risk Perception and Influencing Factors: An Example of Jiaozuo City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Saud Alshehri & Yacine Rezgui & Haijiang Li, 2013. "Public perception of the risk of disasters in a developing economy: the case of Saudi Arabia," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 65(3), pages 1813-1830, February.
    5. Branden B. Johnson, 2018. "Residential Location and Psychological Distance in Americans’ Risk Views and Behavioral Intentions Regarding Zika Virus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2561-2579, December.
    6. Ewa Lechowska, 2022. "Approaches in research on flood risk perception and their importance in flood risk management: a review," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 111(3), pages 2343-2378, April.
    7. Judy Lawrence & Dorothee Quade & Julia Becker, 2014. "Integrating the effects of flood experience on risk perception with responses to changing climate risk," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(3), pages 1773-1794, December.
    8. Eoin O'Neill & Finbarr Brereton & Harutyun Shahumyan & J. Peter Clinch, 2016. "The Impact of Perceived Flood Exposure on Flood‐Risk Perception: The Role of Distance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(11), pages 2158-2186, November.
    9. Md Omar Faruk & Keshav Lall Maharjan, 2022. "Impact of Farmers’ Participation in Community-Based Organizations on Adoption of Flood Adaptation Strategies: A Case Study in a Char-Land Area of Sirajganj District Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.
    10. Eoin O’Neill & Michael Brennan & Finbarr Brereton & Harutyun Shahumyan, 2015. "Exploring a spatial statistical approach to quantify flood risk perception using cognitive maps," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(3), pages 1573-1601, April.
    11. Farman Ullah & Shahab E. Saqib & Mokbul Morshed Ahmad & Mahmoud Ali Fadlallah, 2020. "Flood risk perception and its determinants among rural households in two communities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 104(1), pages 225-247, October.
    12. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    13. Meilutytė-Lukauskienė D. & Akstinas V. & Vaitulionytė M. & Tomkevičienė A., 2022. "Behaviour of the 2010 flood in Lithuania: management and socio-economic risks," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 1-29, March.
    14. Yi Ge & Guangfei Yang & Xiaotao Wang & Wen Dou & Xueer Lu & Jie Mao, 2021. "Understanding risk perception from floods: a case study from China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 105(3), pages 3119-3140, February.
    15. Ewa Lechowska, 2018. "What determines flood risk perception? A review of factors of flood risk perception and relations between its basic elements," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 94(3), pages 1341-1366, December.
    16. Wim Kellens & Teun Terpstra & Philippe De Maeyer, 2013. "Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 24-49, January.
    17. Prabin Rokaya & Sujata Budhathoki & Karl-Erich Lindenschmidt, 2018. "Ice-jam flood research: a scoping review," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 94(3), pages 1439-1457, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vicente Martínez-Tur & Vicente Peñarroja & Miguel A Serrano & Vanesa Hidalgo & Carolina Moliner & Alicia Salvador & Adrián Alacreu-Crespo & Esther Gracia & Agustín Molina, 2014. "Intergroup Conflict and Rational Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Melissa Matlock & Suellen Hopfer & Oladele A. Ogunseitan, 2019. "Communicating Risk for a Climate-Sensitive Disease: A Case Study of Valley Fever in Central California," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Harrington, Jean & Morgan, Myfanwy, 2016. "Understanding kidney transplant patients' treatment choices: The interaction of emotion with medical and social influences on risk preferences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 43-50.
    4. Tomas Bonavia & Josué Brox-Ponce, 2018. "Shame in decision making under risk conditions: Understanding the effect of transparency," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Robinson, Angela & Covey, Judith & Spencer, Anne & Loomes, Graham, 2010. "Are some deaths worse than others? The effect of 'labelling' on people's perceptions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 444-455, June.
    6. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    7. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2003. "Communicating Risk: Wireless and Hardwired," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 241-248, April.
    8. Samahita, Margaret & Holm, Håkan J., 2020. "Mining for Mood Effect in the Field," Working Papers 2020:2, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    9. Lynn J. Frewer, 2017. "Consumer acceptance and rejection of emerging agrifood technologies and their applications," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(4), pages 683-704.
    10. De Silva, Muthu & Rossi, Federica & Yip, Nick K.T. & Rosli, Ainurul, 2021. "Does affective evaluation matter for the success of university-industry collaborations? A sentiment analysis of university-industry collaborative project reports," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    11. Saravanamuthu, Kala & Lehman, Cheryl, 2013. "Enhancing stakeholder interaction through environmental risk accounts," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 410-437.
    12. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    13. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    14. Ruth E Alcock & Jerry Busby, 2006. "Risk Migration and Scientific Advance: The Case of Flame‐Retardant Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 369-381, April.
    15. John H Matthews & Bart AJ Wickel & Sarah Freeman, 2011. "Converging Currents in Climate-Relevant Conservation: Water, Infrastructure, and Institutions," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-4, September.
    16. Rita Saleh & Angela Bearth & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "“Chemophobia” Today: Consumers’ Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2668-2682, December.
    17. Sudeep Bhatia & Lukasz Walasek & Paul Slovic & Howard Kunreuther, 2021. "The More Who Die, the Less We Care: Evidence from Natural Language Analysis of Online News Articles and Social Media Posts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 179-203, January.
    18. Wardley, Marcus & Alberhasky, Max, 2021. "Framing zero: Why losing nothing is better than gaining nothing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    19. Tibert Verhagen & Daniel Bloemers, 2018. "Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of online purchase intentions: a hierarchical test across product types," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 537-561, September.
    20. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:58:y:2011:i:1:p:269-287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.