1. Managing Flash Floods Risk Perception from a Cultural Perspective

2. Introductions Who is here Why we are here –We all share a common interest in reducing losses to life and property from flash floods What to expect from this meeting –Overview of proposed risk perception research project –Discussion: How to make this information useful and practical for implementation

3. CLIMAS AFMA, NWS, ADEM, FCDs, etc. Forging the partnership Fieldwork: surveys and analysis Present findings, feedback, brainstorming Develop new products Implement new products Ashley Coles’s master’s thesis Final report

4. Mileti, 1995 Effective warnings must be… Heard Understood –What is happening, time, how to prepare Believed –Warning is true, danger is imminent Personalized –Risk to self or property is perceived Responded to

5. Risk perception research Typical approaches There is an appropriate response, anything else is irrational –Behavior as a result of individual psychological (dis?)function –Behavior as a result of human nature People need more education and information More recently and frequently, studies are beginning to account for the effects of cultural and social contexts

6. What is culture? A way of life learned from and shared by a social unit –Attitudes, beliefs, values, and habits Not just national, also “gender, ethnicity, religion, cohort or generation, historical period, profession, social class, and country of origin” (Kitayama & Markus, 1995, p. 368) Norms, values, and practices shape how individuals process information and make decisions

8. Main cultural factors Trust –In science, government, and responsible agency Self-efficacy –How confident people feel in their ability to handle ordinary life as well as extreme events Social incorporation –Extent of social networks –Social amplification of risk Social autonomy –Degree of freedom to fill any social role Time orientation –Focus on past, present, or future

9. Mary Douglas: Risk and Blame Isolate Individualist/Market Hierarchy/Bureaucracy Sect/Enclave Incorporation  Autonomy 

10. But it’s more complicated… Hazard information GenderTrust Age Self-efficacy EthnicityIncorporation SocioeconomicAutonomy Etc.Time orientation Behavior Risk Perception

11. Implications for mitigation Can education and information are likely to change attitudes, values, and beliefs? Risk managers must speak to these attitudes, values, and beliefs –Which means that managers must “know” the people they are responsible for protecting

12. Why use a survey? Can perform both quantitative and qualitative analyses on the data –Quantitative: regression analysis –Qualitative: open-ended questions for deeper insight Able to reach a broad spectrum of various cultural groups

13. Who is the target sample? People who have crossed flooded washes –Problematic because of death, stigma, and number of successful crossings 1000 Tucson residents in flood prone areas –Specific neighborhoods with proximity to commonly flooded intersections or crossings

14. Plan to increase response rate Week 1: First survey packet mailed out –Survey in English and Spanish –Consent forms –Reply-paid envelope Week 2: Reminder Postcard Week 3: Second survey packet mailed out Offer drawing for $20 Visa Gift Card Reduce effects of stigma

15. What does the survey ask? Using direct and indirect methods –Cultural factors –Historical and hypothetical behavior Relevant demographic information Compared to the average person, I am a good judge of whether flood waters are dangerous. CompletelySomewhatNeutralSomewhat Completely DisagreeDisagreeAgree Agree

16. What do you think? Is this potentially useful for your flood mitigation decision-making? Do you have the desire and ability to implement new mitigation strategies based on these findings? What information would you like to gather with the survey tool?