Factors predicting citizens’ risk tolerance regarding earthquakes

Abstract

People tolerate different levels of risk from different hazards in their day-to-day life. Perceptions of risks and the amount of risk mitigation people desire for different hazards vary. Previous research shows that the psychometric properties of different hazards predict the level of risk people tolerate for various hazards, but not for earthquakes. Risk tolerance is likely to also be affected by factors other than the psychometric properties of hazards. This research tested how earthquakes score on psychometric risk properties compared to five other hazards, and aimed to replicate previous research on the risk factors predicting risk tolerance. Secondly, the research aimed to test if other factors, namely framing effects, risk perception and fatalistic thinking predict risk tolerance for earthquakes. In Study 1, participants from Wellington, New Zealand (N = 139) rated six different hazards (nuclear power, smoking, alcohol, driving, flying and earthquakes) on several risk characteristics and measures of risk tolerance. The results showed that the different hazards were perceived differently in terms of risk tolerance and that participants thought different risk mitigation actions were appropriate for the six hazards. Factor analysis showed that factors derived from risk characteristics did not predict risk tolerance. Study 2 (N = 173) assessed the effects of framing messages, risk perception and fatalism on risk tolerance (judgments about the firmness of the legislation; willingness to pay tax) and judgments about who should pay. The frames had an effect on participants’ concern about the risk, but did not affect the other measures. Generally participants thought that the Government should pay for strengthening buildings, however, those participants who perceived damage as preventable (fatalism measure) thought that private owners should pay for strengthening.