IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i14p6328-d1698806.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Residents’ Perception of Flood Prediction Products: The Study of NASA’s Satellite Enhanced Snowmelt Flood Prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Yue Ge

    (School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32801, USA)

  • Sara Iman

    (Department of Security Studies, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Yago Martín

    (Departamento de Geografía, Historia y Filosofía, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain)

  • Siew Hoon Lim

    (Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58108, USA)

  • Jennifer M. Jacobs

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA)

  • Xinhua Jia

    (Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58108, USA)

Abstract

In the context of emergency management, individual or household decisions to engage in risk mitigation behaviors are widely recognized to be influenced by a benefit–cost perception (perceived applied value (PAV) vs. perceived economic value (PEV), respectively). To better understand how such decisions are made, we conducted a mail survey ( N = 211) of households living in the Red River of the North Basin, North Dakota, in 2018. The survey is aimed at understanding the overall experience of households with flooding and their behavior toward advanced protective strategies against future floods by analyzing household PEV—their willingness to pay for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Satellite Enhanced Snowmelt Flood Prediction system. This paper presents a mediation model in which various predictors (flood risk, experience, flood knowledge, flood risk perception, flood preparedness, flood mitigation, and flood insurance) are analyzed in relation to the PAV of the new Satellite Enhanced Snowmelt Flood Predictions in the Red River of the North Basin, which, in turn, may shape the PEV of this product. We discuss the potential implications for both the emergency management research community and professionals regarding the application of advanced risk mitigation technologies to help protect and sustain communities across the country from floods and other natural disasters. This paper provides a greater understanding of the economic and social aspects of sustainability in the context of emergency management and community development.

Suggested Citation

  • Yue Ge & Sara Iman & Yago Martín & Siew Hoon Lim & Jennifer M. Jacobs & Xinhua Jia, 2025. "Residents’ Perception of Flood Prediction Products: The Study of NASA’s Satellite Enhanced Snowmelt Flood Prediction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:14:p:6328-:d:1698806
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/14/6328/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/14/6328/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas H. Douthat & Fahmida Akhter & Rachelle Sanderson & Jerrod Penn, 2023. "Stakeholder Perceptions about Incorporating Externalities and Vulnerability into Benefit–Cost Analysis Tools for Watershed Flood Risk Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, June.
    3. Md Omar Faruk & Keshav Lall Maharjan, 2023. "The Determinants of Farmers’ Perceived Flood Risk and Their Flood Adaptation Assessments: A Study in a Char-Land Area of Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Carolyn Kousky & Howard Kunreuther & Michael LaCour-Little & Susan Wachter, 2020. "Flood Risk and the U.S. Housing Market," Journal of Housing Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(S1), pages 3-24, December.
    5. Craig Landry & Dylan Turner, 2020. "Risk Perceptions and Flood Insurance: Insights from Homeowners on the Georgia Coast," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Michalis Diakakis & Michalis Skordoulis & Petros Kyriakopoulos, 2022. "Public Perceptions of Flood and Extreme Weather Early Warnings in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.
    7. J. C. J. H. Aerts & W. J. Botzen & K. C. Clarke & S. L. Cutter & J. W. Hall & B. Merz & E. Michel-Kerjan & J. Mysiak & S. Surminski & H. Kunreuther, 2018. "Integrating human behaviour dynamics into flood disaster risk assessment," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(3), pages 193-199, March.
    8. Michael K. Lindell & David J. Whitney, 2000. "Correlates of Household Seismic Hazard Adjustment Adoption," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 13-26, February.
    9. Teun Terpstra & Michael K. Lindell & Jan M. Gutteling, 2009. "Does Communicating (Flood) Risk Affect (Flood) Risk Perceptions? Results of a Quasi‐Experimental Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1141-1155, August.
    10. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Manqing Wu & Guochun Wu, 2020. "An Analysis of Rural Households’ Earthquake-Resistant Construction Behavior: Evidence from Pingliang and Yuxi, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Graf, Julia & Renner, Renate & Klebel, Thomas, 2025. "Bridging Warning and Adaptation Addressing Risk Communication Strategies for Short-Term Natural Hazard Warnings and Long-Term Risk Adaptation – A Scoping Review," SocArXiv tmwrv_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Xuemei Fang & Liang Cao & Luyi Zhang & Binbin Peng, 2023. "Risk perception and resistance behavior intention of residents living near chemical industry parks: an empirical analysis in 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. 115(2), pages 1655-1675, January.
    4. Hao-Teng Cheng & Ko-Wan Tsou, 2018. "Mitigation Policy Acceptance Model: An Analysis of Individual Decision Making Process toward Residential Seismic Strengthening," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-12, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Yibin Ao & Hongying Zhang & Linchuan Yang & Yan Wang & Igor Martek & Gang Wang, 2021. "Impacts of earthquake knowledge and risk perception on earthquake preparedness of rural residents," 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. 107(2), pages 1287-1310, June.
    7. Nicolás C Bronfman & Pamela C Cisternas & Paula B Repetto & Javiera V Castañeda, 2019. "Natural disaster preparedness in a multi-hazard environment: Characterizing the sociodemographic profile of those better (worse) prepared," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Laura N. Rickard & Z. Janet Yang & Jonathon P. Schuldt & Gina M. Eosco & Clifford W. Scherer & Ricardo A. Daziano, 2017. "Sizing Up a Superstorm: Exploring the Role of Recalled Experience and Attribution of Responsibility in Judgments of Future Hurricane Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2334-2349, December.
    9. Yaodong Yang & Huaqing Ren & Han Zhang, 2022. "Understanding Consumer Panic Buying Behaviors during the Strict Lockdown on Omicron Variant: A Risk Perception View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Abdul‐Akeem Sadiq & John D. Graham, 2016. "Exploring the Predictors of Organizational Preparedness for Natural Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 1040-1053, May.
    11. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    12. Nora Louise Schwaller & Todd K. BenDor, 2021. "Differential residential perspectives on in situ protection and retreat as strategies for climate adaptation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Zahra Asgarizadeh & Robert Gifford, 2022. "Community and psychological barriers to tsunami preparation," 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. 112(2), pages 1321-1336, June.
    14. Dingde Xu & Zhuolin Yong & Xin Deng & Yi Liu & Kai Huang & Wenfeng Zhou & Zhixing Ma, 2019. "Financial Preparation, Disaster Experience, and Disaster Risk Perception of Rural Households in Earthquake-Stricken Areas: Evidence From the Wenchuan and Lushan Earthquakes in China’s Sichuan Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Timothy Sim & Li-San Hung & Gui-Wu Su & Ke Cui, 2018. "Interpersonal communication sources and natural hazard risk perception: a case study of a rural Chinese village," 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 1307-1326, December.
    16. Mahalasmi Radhakrishnan & Mohammad Nurul Hassan Reza & Abdullah Al Mamun & Muhammad Mehedi Masud & Zafir Khan Mohamed Makhbul, 2025. "Behavioral insights into insurance purchase among flash flood survivors in Malaysia," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    17. P. Bubeck & W. J. W. Botzen & J. C. J. H. Aerts, 2012. "A Review of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1481-1495, September.
    18. Yue ‘Gurt’ Ge & Michael K Lindell, 2016. "County planners’ perceptions of land-use planning tools for environmental hazard mitigation: A survey in the U.S. Pacific states," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(4), pages 716-736, July.
    19. Dingde Xu & Wenfeng Zhou & Xin Deng & Zhixing Ma & Zhuolin Yong & Cheng Qin, 2020. "Information credibility, disaster risk perception and evacuation willingness of rural households in 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. 103(3), pages 2865-2882, September.
    20. Yilin Zou & Alexia Stock & Rachel Davidson & Linda Nozick & Joseph Trainor & Jamie Kruse, 2020. "Perceived attributes of hurricane-related retrofits and their effect on household adoption," 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 201-224, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:14:p:6328-:d:1698806. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.