Factors for Self-Protective Behavior against Extreme Weather Events in the Philippines
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Description of the Study Region
2.2. Sample and Survey Method
2.3. Steps of Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Reported Self-Protective Behavior
3.2. Accuracy of Perceived Trends in Occurrence of Extreme Weather Events
3.3. Explanatory Factors for Self-Protective Behavior
3.3.1. Results Regarding the Overall Sample
3.3.2. Results Per City
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Annotation
References
- Kreft, S.; Eckstein, D.; Dorsch, L.; Fischer, L. Global Climate Risk Index—Who Suffers Most from Extreme Weather Events? Weather-Related Loss Events in 2014 and 1995-2014; Briefing Paper; Germanwatch: Bonn, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Government of the Philippines. Second National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; 2014. Available online: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/phlnc2.pdf (accessed on 17 October 2019).
- Jaranilla-Sanchez, P.A.; Wang, L.; Koike, T. Modeling the hydrologic responses of the Pampanga River basin, Philippines: A quantitative approach for identifying droughts. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank and United Nations. Natural Hazards, Unnatural Disasters: The Economics of Effective Prevention; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance. Philippines—Disaster Management Reference Handbook. 2018. Available online: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Philippines_2018-0318.pdf (accessed on 17 September 2019).
- Swiss NGO DRR Platform. Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in the Philippines. 2014. Available online: https://www.shareweb.ch/site/DRR/Documents/About%20Us/Risk_Assessment_Philippines_2014.pdf (accessed on 15 August 2018).
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Najafi, M.; Ardalan, A.; Akbarisari, A.; Noorbala, A.A.; Elmi, H. The theory of planned behavior and disaster preparedness. PLoS Curr. 2017, 9, 5143824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daellenbach, K.; Parkinson, J.; Krisjanous, J. Just how prepared are you? An application of marketing segmentation and theory of planned behavior for disaster preparation. J. Nonprofit Public Sect. Mark. 2018, 30, 413–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulilis, J.-P.; Duval, T.S. Negative Threat Appeals and Earthquake Preparedness: A Person-Relative-to-Event (PrE) Model of Coping with Threat. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1995, 25, 1319–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindell, M.K.; Perry, R.W. The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence. Risk Anal. 2012, 32, 616–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grothmann, T.; Patt, A. Adaptive capacity and human cognition: The process of individual adaptation to climate change. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2005, 15, 199–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, R.W. Cognitive and Physiological Processes in Fear Appeals and Attitude Change: A Revised Theory of Protection Motivation; Cacioppo, B.L., Petty, L.L., Eds.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 1983; pp. 153–177. [Google Scholar]
- Rogers, R.W.; Prentice-Dunn, S. Protection motivation theory. In Handbook of Health Behaviour Research. I: Personal and Social Determinants; Gochman, D.S., Ed.; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1997; pp. 113–132. [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, Y.; Dallimer, M. What motivates rural households to adapt to climate change? Clim. Dev. 2016, 8, 110–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuruppu, N.; Liverman, D. Mental preparation for climate adaptation: The role of cognition and culture in enhancing adaptive capacity of water management in Kiribati. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2011, 21, 657–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siedschlag, D. Hochwasser & Eigenvorsorge—Untersuchung von Einflussfaktoren Persönlicher Schutzmaßnahmen. 2010. (In German). Available online: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/57862/1/647139170.pdf (accessed on 3 March 2020).
- Grothmann, R.; Reusswig, F. People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Nat. Hazards 2006, 38, 101–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bamberg, S.; Masson, T.; Brewitt, K.; Nemetschek, N. Threat, coping and flood prevention—A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 54, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Valkengoed, A.M.; Steg, L. Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2019, 9, 158–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grothmann, T. Wetterextreme und Private Schadensprävention—Enwicklung, Überprüfung und Praktische Anwendbarkeit der Theorie Privater Proaktiver Wetterextrem-Vorsorge; Otto-von-Guericke-Universität: Magdeburg, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Adeola, F. Katrina cataclysm: Does Duration of Residency and Prior Experience Affect Impacts, Evacuation, and Adaptation Behavior among Survivors? Environ. Behav. 2009, 41, 459–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peacock, W.G. Hurricane mitigation status and factors influencing mitigation status among Florida’s single-family homeowners. Nat. Hazards Rev. 2003, 4, 149–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lo, A.Y. The role of social norms in climate adaptation: Mediating risk perception and flood insurance purchase. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 1249–1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peacock, W.G.; Brody, S.D.; Highfield, W. Hurricane risk perceptions among Florida’s single family homeowners. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2005, 73, 120–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhlicke, C.; Scolobig, A.; Tapsell, S.; Steinführer, A.; De Marchi, B. Contextualizing social vulnerability: Findings from case studies across Europe. Nat. Hazards 2011, 58, 789–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scolobig, A.; De Marchi, B.; Borga, M. The missing link between flood risk awareness and preparedness: Findings from case studies in an Alpine Region. Nat. Hazards 2012, 63, 499–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arbuckle, J.G., Jr.; Morton, L.W.; Hobbs, J. Understanding Farmer Perspectives on Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation: The Roles of Trust in Sources of Climate Information, Climate Change Beliefs, and Perceived Risk. Environ. Behav. 2013, 47, 205–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frank, E.; Eakin, H.; López-Carr, D. Social identity, perception and motivation in adaptation to climate risk in the coffee sector of Chiapas, Mexico. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2011, 21, 66–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waibel, H.; Pahlisch, T.H.; Völker, M. Farmers’ perceptions of and adaptations to climate change in Southeast Asia: The case study from Thailand and Vietnam. In Climate Smart Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 137–160. [Google Scholar]
- Werg, J.; Grothmann, T.; Schmidt, P. Assessing social capacity and vulnerability of private households to natural hazards-integrating psychological and governance factors. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13, 1613–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botzen, W.J.W.; Aerts, J.C.J.H.; Bergh, J.C.J.M. Willingness of homeowners to mitigate climate risk through insurance. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 2265–2277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toole, S.; Klocker, N.; Head, L. Re-thinking climate change adaptation and capacities at the household scale. Clim. Chang. 2016, 135, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dietz, T.; Dan, A.; Shwom, R. Support for climate change policy: Social psychological and social structural influences. Rural Sociol. 2007, 72, 185–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cologna, V.; Siegrist, M. The role of trust for climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviour: A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 101428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moyo, M.; Mvumi, B.M.; Kunzekweguta, M.; Mazvimavi, K.; Craufurd, P.; Dorward, P. Farmer perceptions on climate change and variability in semi-arid Zimbabwe in relation to climatology evidence. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 2012, 20, 317–335. [Google Scholar]
- Bradford, R.A.; O’Sullivan, J.J.; Craats, I.M.; Krykow, J.; Rotko, P.; Aaltonen, J.; Bonaiuto, M.; De Dominicis, S.; Waylen, K.; Schelfaut, K. Risk perception—Issues for flood management in Europe. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2012, 12, 2299–2309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindell, M.K.; Hwang, S.N. Households’ Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment. Risk Anal. 2008, 28, 539–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalkstein, A.J.; Sheridan, S.C. The social impacts of the heat–health watch/warning system in Phoenix, Arizona: Assessing the perceived risk and response of the public. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2007, 52, 43–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Röschel, L.; Graef, F.; Dietrich, O.; Schäfer, M.P.; Haase, D. Individual local farmers’ perceptions of environmental change in Tanzania. Water 2018, 10, 525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulili, J.-P.; Duval, T.S. The PrE Model of Coping and Tornado Preparedness/ Moderating Effects of Responsibility. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1997, 27, 1750–1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero-Lankao, P.; Qin, H.; Dickinson, K. Urban vulnerability to temperature-related hazards: A meta-analysis and meta-knowledge approach. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2012, 22, 670–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lutz, W.; Cuaresma, J.C.; Sanderson, W. The demography of educational attainment and economic growth. Science 2008, 319, 1047–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lutz, W.; Muttarak, R.; Striessnig, E. Universal education is key to enhanced climate adaptation. Science 2014, 346, 1061–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mason, L.R. Household solid fuel use in the Philippines: An exploratory spatial and social analysis. Asia Pac. J. Soc. Work Dev. 2012, 22, 228–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rybski, D.; Spies, M.; Zhou, B.; Kropp, J.P. Summary of Research on Area-Specific Climate Change Scenarios for Cities in the Philippines; Potsdam-Institute for Climate Impact Research: Potsdam, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Statista. Philippines: Unemployment Rate from 1998 to 2018. 2018. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/578722/unemployment-rate-in-philippines (accessed on 28 September 2019).
- Mayring, P. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken; 12. Auflage; Beltz: Weinheim, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Mayring, P. Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical background and procedures. In Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 365–380. [Google Scholar]
- Bryman, A.; Cramer, D. Quantitative Data Analysis for Social Scientists; Routledge: London, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Perez, A.M.C.; Blanco, A.C. Combination of MODIS Vegetation Indices, GRACE Terrestrial Water Storage Changes, and In-Situ Measurements for Drought Assessment in Cagayan River Basin, Philippines. J. Nat. Resour. Dev. 2017, 7, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perez, G.J.; Macapagal, M.; Olivares, R.; Macapagal, E.M.; Comiso, J.C. Forecasting and Monitoring Agricultural Drought in the Philippines. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2016, 41, 1263–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vicente-Serrano, S.M.; Beguería, S.; López-Moreno, J.I. A Multiscalar Drought Index Sensitive to Global Warming: The Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index. J. Clim. 2010, 23, 1696–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. A power primer. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 112, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, R.S.; Herziger, A.; Hamilton, M.; Brooks, J.S. From incremental to transformative adaptation in individual responses to climate-exacerbated hazards. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2020, 10, 200–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henrich, J.; Heine, S.J.; Norenzayan, A. Most people are not WEIRD. Nature 2010, 466, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- The World Bank Individuals Using the Internet (% of Population)—Philippines. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS?end=2017&locations=PH&start=2011&view=chart (accessed on 1 May 2020).
- Martin-Shields, C.P. When information becomes action: Drivers of individuals’ trust in broadcast versus peer-to-peer information in disaster response. Disasters 2019, 43, 612–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moser, S.C. Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: What more is there to say? Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2016, 7, 345–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Leon, E.; Pittock, J. Integrating climate change adaptation and climate-related disaster risk-reduction policy in developing countries: A case study in the Philippines. Clim. Dev. 2017, 9, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhlicke, C.; Seebauer, S.; Hudson, P.; Begg, C.; Bubeck, P.; Dittmer, C.; Grothmann, T.; Heidenreich, A.; Kreibich, H.; Lorenz, D.F. The behavioral turn in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2020, 7, e1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francisco, H.A.; Predo, C.D.; Manasboonphempool, A.; Tran, P.; Jarungrattanapong, R. Determinants of household decisions on adaptation to extreme climate events in Southeast Asia. EEPSEA research report series/IDRC. In Regional Office for Southeast and East Asia, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia; EEPSEA: Laguna, Philippines, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Amundsen, H.; Berglund, F.; Westskog, H. Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation—A question of multilevel governance? Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 2010, 28, 276–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adger, W.N.; Agrawal, S.; Mirza, M.M.W.; Conde, C.; O’brien, K.L.; Pulhin, J.; Pulwarty, R.; Smit, B.; Takahashi, K. Assessment of Adaptation Practices, Options, Constraints and Capacity; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Binh, P.T.; Zhu, X.; Groeneveld, R.A.; van Ierland, E.C. Risk communication, women’s participation and flood mitigation in Vietnam: An experimental study. Land Use Policy 2020, 104436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngo, C.C.; Poortvliet, P.M.; Feindt, P.H. Drivers of flood and climate change risk perceptions and intention to adapt: An explorative survey in coastal and delta Vietnam. J. Risk Res. 2020, 23, 424–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tversky, A.; Kahnemann, D. Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn. Psychol. 1973, 2, 207–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, S. Journalistic Norms, Cultural Values, and Coverage of Climate Change in the Philippines. Environ. Commun. 2016, 10, 492–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fritsche, I.; Barth, M.; Jugert, P.; Masson, T.; Reese, G. A social identity model of pro-environmental action (SIMPEA). Psychol. Rev. 2018, 125, 245–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kousky, C. Disasters as learning experiences or disasters as policy opportunities? Examining flood insurance purchases after hurricanes. Risk Anal. 2017, 37, 517–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Eisenack, K.; Moser, S.C.; Hoffmann, E.; Klein, R.J.T.; Oberlack, C.; Pechan, A.; Rotter, M.; Termeer, C.J.A.M. Explaining and overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2014, 4, 867–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kreibich, H.; Christenberger, S.; Schwarze, R. Economic motivation of households to undertake private precautionary measures against floods. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 11, 309–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Valkengoed, A.M.; Steg, L. Climate change adaptation by individuals and households: A psychological perspective. In Global Commission on Adaptation Background Paper; University of Groningen: Groningen, The Netherlands, 2019; Available online: https://cdn.gca.org/assets/2019-12/ClimateChangeAdaptationByIndvsAndHouseholds.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2020).
Variable | Operationalization | Answer Categories 1 | References |
---|---|---|---|
R0. Perceived past weather trends | As far as you can remember—looking at the last couple of years or even decades—has there been a change in the frequency of periods of hot days (droughts/strong rains) occurring in your city? | Less often than before, as often as usual, more often than before | [38] |
Factors relevant to risk appraisal (R.1–R.6) (Broader understanding than in MPPACC) | |||
R1. Perceived future probability (+) | In the future, in your opinion, how will the frequency of periods of hot days/droughts/strong rains change in your city? | Will become less often; no change; will become more often | [17,39,40] |
R2. Perceived severity (+) | All in all, how good or bad are periods of hot days/droughts/strong rains for you? | Bad; neither good nor bad, good | [39,40,41] |
R3. Reliance on public adaptation (−) | I think the government will take care that impacts of weather won’t affect me. | Don’t agree; more or less agree; agree strongly | [20] |
R4. Perceived risk knowledge (+) | I feel well informed about weather changes in my city over several years. | Don’t agree; more or less agree; agree strongly | [34] |
R5. Effects of weather events | What effects do periods of hot days/droughts/strong rains have on your personal life? | Open answers | |
R6. Livelihood dependency on environment (+) | Is your livelihood dependent on the environment? | Not at all; to some extent; very much | [32,42] |
Factors relevant to adaptation appraisal (A1–A7) (Broader understanding than in MPPACC) | |||
A1. Perceived feasibility of self-protective measures (+) | How possible is it for you to protect your house, yourself, your income from negative effects? | Not at all possible; possible to some extent; very possible | [17,18,20] |
A2. Perceived adaptation knowledge (+) | I feel well informed about strategies or measures to deal with weather changes in my city. | Don’t agree; more or less agree; agree strongly | [19,25,27] |
A3. Perceived barriers to self-protective behavior (−) | What makes it difficult for you to protect yourself? | Open answers | |
A4. Perceived self-protective measures by others (+) | People I know have already taken measures to deal with weather events. | Don’t agree; more or less agree; agree strongly | [23,24,25,26] |
A5. Perceived private responsibility for protective measures (+) | All citizens are individually responsible for preventing damages due to weather events in their household. | Don’t agree; more or less agree; agree strongly | [12,43] |
A6. Information from different sources on weather changes and protective measures (+) | How much information concerning weather changes (measures to protect yourself from weather events) do you get from different information sources (TV, newspaper, radio, scientific institutions, NGOs, government 2) | None; some; very much (separate tick for each information source) | [36] |
A7. Trust in different information sources (+) | How much do you trust the information sources? | None; some; very much (separate tick for each source) | [22,28,29,30,31,37] |
Socio-demographic factors (S1–S4) | |||
S1. Age (−) | How old are you? | Count | [44] |
S2. Gender | Are you female or male? | Female/male | [44] |
S3. Educational level (+) | What is your highest educational qualification? | No formal; prim; second; voc; tert; B.A. or higher | [45,46] |
S4. Household/economic status (+) | What do you use for cooking? | Coal/wood; gas or electricity; other | [44,47] |
Dependent Variable: Self-Protective Measures (D.1–D.2) | |||
D1. Self-protective behavior (any measures) | Have you undertaken any measures to protect yourself from negative effects of weather events? | Yes; no | |
D2. Measures by weather extreme | → If yes, please explain shortly which measures Heat D2—H; Drought D2—D; Rain D2—R | Open answers, sorted by weather event |
Baguio | Dagupan | Tuguegarao | |
---|---|---|---|
Province | Benguet | Pangasinan | Cagayan |
Population | 300,000 | 160,000 | 130,000 |
Geography | 1500 masl in the mountains of Luzon | Coastal, West coast of Luzon, few masl | 20–30 masl, in low plain, borders river Cagayan |
Climate | Subtropical highland climate (mild) | Tropical monsoon climate | Tropical monsoon climate |
Mean annual precipitation | 3900 mm | 2400 mm | 1750 mm |
Mean annual temperature | 19.5 °C | 27.7 °C | 27.1 °C |
Trends in mean temperature 1 | Accumulative increase of ca. 0.23 °C (not significant) | Slight decline of 0.12 °C (not significant) | Decline of −1.07 °C (significant at p < 0.01) |
Trends in mean precipitation | Vast interannual variations, no significant trend | Vast interannual variations, no significant trend | Vast interannual variations, no significant trend |
Assumed main weather-related risks 2 | Flooding due to strong rain; rainfall triggered landslides | Flooding due to strong rain and coastal storm surges | Flooding due to strong rain in the river basin; heat and drought |
Baguio (n = 70) | Dagupan (n = 71) | Tuguegarao (n = 69) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
HEAT | R5. Reported effects of weather event (counts) | Health (34.3) | Health (47.9) | Health (88.4) |
Mood (32.8) | Mood (21.1) | Mobility/stay inside (24.6) | ||
Livelihood (11.4) | Financial (15.5) | Livelihood/farming (13.0) | ||
D1—H. Self-protective measures Yes/No (Missing) | 27.1/71.4 (1.4) | 19.7/60.6 (19.7) | 13.0/75.4 (11.6) | |
D2—H. Heat measures taken | Plant backyard trees (8.6) | Stay hydrated (11.3) | Avoid exposure (5.8) | |
Use protective clothes (5.7) | Stay inside (5.6) | Plant (backyard) trees (4.4) | ||
Stay hydrated (5.7) | Plant backyard trees (5.6) | Buy fan (1.5) | ||
DROUGHT | R5. Effects of weather event (counts) | Water shortage (13) | Livelihood/farming (14) | Livelihood/farming (19) |
Personal hygiene (10) | Financial expenses (10) | Water shortage (8) | ||
Livelihood/farming (9) | Water shortage (8) | Hunger & thirst (4) | ||
D1—D. Self-protective measures Yes/No (Missing) | 20.0/78.6 (1.4) | 11.3/69.0 (19.7) | 20.3/68.1 (11.6) | |
D2—D. Drought measures taken | Stock water (8.6) | Stock water (9.9) | Conserve water (8.7) | |
Conserve water (2.9) | Stock supplies (2.8) | Alternative livelihood (4.4) | ||
Reuse water (2.9) | Reuse water (1.4) | Reduce expenses (2.9) | ||
RAIN | R5. Effects of weather event (counts) | Livelihood/income (32.9) | Flooded property (26.8) | Livelihood/income (40.6) |
Health (15.7) | Health (23.9) | Health (26.1) | ||
Disrupted routines (14.3) | Livelihood/income (22.5) | Flooded property (17.4) | ||
D1—R. Yes/No/Missing in % | 68.6/30.0/1.4 | 56.3/23.9/19.7 | 66.7/21.7/11.6 | |
D2—R. Rain measures taken | Emergency supplies (37.1) | Emergency supplies (18.3) | Emergency supplies (18.8) | |
Fix/secure house (12.9) | Fix/secure house (15.5) | Plant trees (15.9) | ||
Clean/avoid clogging (8.6) | Elevated flooring (9.9) | Fix/secure house (10.1) | ||
ALL EVENTS | D1. Self-protective behavior Yes/No/Missing in % | 78.6/20.0/1.4 | 60.6/21.1/18.3 | 68.1/20.3/11.6 |
A3. Perceived barriers to self-protective behavior | Unpredictability of weather events (34.3) Financial (31.4) Lack of information (15.7) | Financial (21.1) Unpredictability of weather events (9.9) Lack of information (5.6) | Financial (31.9) Location (4.4) God’s will (2.9) Unpredictability of weather events (2.9) |
Factors Relevant for Self-Protective Behavior | City | D2—Heat | D2—Drought | D2—Rain | D1 All Events | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RISK APPRAISAL RELATED FACTORS | R1+R2. Risk perception | All cities | 0.12 */0.03 | −0.05/0.00 | −0.11/0.01 | −0.01/0.00 |
Baguio | 0.11/0.03 | 0.05/0.02 | 0.00/0.01 | 0.18/0.09 | ||
Dagupan | 0.20/0.05 | 0.16/0.07 | 0.09/0.01 | 0.19/0.04 | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.09/0.03 | −0.31 */0.18 * | −0.45 **/0.36 ** | −0.41 **/0.32 * | ||
R3. Reliance on public adaptation | All cities | −0.01/0.00 | −0.10/0.01 | 0.04/0.02 | 0.06/0.01 | |
Baguio | 0.04/0.00 | 0.05/0.00 | 0.02/0.00 | 0.07/0.01 | ||
Dagupan | 0.03/0.00 | −0.26 */0.12 | 0.08/0.01 | 0.02/0.00 | ||
Tuguegarao | −0.09/0.01 | −0.14/0.03 | 0.01/0.00 | 0.07/0.01 | ||
R4. Perceived risk knowledge | All cities | 0.12/0.02 | 0.24 **/0.10 ** | 0.11/0.02 | 0.15 */0.04 * | |
Baguio | 0.07/0.01 | 0.04/0.00 | 0.06/0.01 | 0.09/0.02 | ||
Dagupan | 0.24 */0.09 | 0.23 */0.09 | 0.20/0.05 | 0.24 */0.08 | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.04/0.00 | 0.45 **/0.36 ** | 0.13/0.03 | 0.13/0.03 | ||
R6. Livelihood dependent on nature | All cities | −0.15 */0.04 * | 0.02/0.00 | −0.02/0.00 | 0.02/0.00 | |
Baguio | −0.09/0.01 | −0.02/0.00 | −0.04/0.00 | 0.01/0.00 | ||
Dagupan | −0.20/0.08 | −0.08/0.01 | −0.18/0.04 | −0.12/0.02 | ||
Tuguegarao | −0.06/0.01 | 0.05/0.01 | 0.10/0.02 | 0.15/0.04 | ||
ADAPTATION APPRAISAL RELATED FACTORS | A1. Perceived feasibility of self-protective measures | All cities | −0.06/0.01 | 0.03/0.00 | 0.37 **/0.24 ** | 0.36 **/0.23 ** |
Baguio | −0.20*/0.06 | 0.13/0.03 | 0.19/0.03 | 0.12/0.03 | ||
Dagupan | −0.02/0.00 | −0.12/0.03 | 0.35 **/0.22 * | 0.35 **/0.23 * | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.05/0.01 | 0.04/0.00 | 0.56 **/0.55 ** | 0.57 **/0.59 ** | ||
A2. Perceived adaptation knowledge | All cities | 0.14*/0.03 | 0.23 **/0.10 ** | 0.19 **/0.06 ** | 0.19 **/0.6 ** | |
Baguio | 0.06/0.01 | 0.08/0.01 | 0.25 */0.10 * | 0.19/0.06 | ||
Dagupan | 0.34 **/0.17 * | 0.34 **/0.20 * | 0.28 */0.12 * | 0.34 **/0.18 * | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.03/0.00 | 0.35 **/0.20 * | 0.09/0.01 | 0.10/0.02 | ||
A4. Perceived self-protection measures by others | All cities | −0.05/0.01 | 0.15 */0.04 * | 0.11/0.02 | 0.15/0.02 | |
Baguio | −0.11/0.02 | 0.01/0.00 | −0.01/0.00 | −0.06/0.01 | ||
Dagupan | 0.06/0.01 | 0.03/0.00 | 0.29 **/0.13 * | 0.29 */0.15 * | ||
Tuguegarao | −0.08/0.01 | 0.46 **/0.38 ** | 0.13/0.03 | 0.20/0.06 | ||
A5. Perceived private responsibility | All cities | 0.01/0.00 | 0.08/0.01 | 0.14 */0.04 * | 0.16 */0.05 * | |
Baguio | −0.01/0.00 | 0.20 */0.09 | 0.14/0.04 | 0.23 */0.09 * | ||
Dagupan | 0.20/0.08 | 0.07/0.00 | 0.24 */0.07 | 0.18/0.02 | ||
Tuguegarao | −0.22/0.05 | 0.01/0.00 | 0.05/0.02 | 0.09/0.03 | ||
A6+A7. Information from (A6) + trust in all information sources (A7) | All cities | 0.07/0.02 | 0.17 **/0.08 * | 0.19 **/0.08 ** | 0.19 **/0.10 ** | |
Baguio | −0.10/0.01 | 0.06/0.01 | 0.03/0.01 | −0.03/0.01 | ||
Dagupan | 0.32 **/0.20 * | 0.28 */0.19 * | 0.30/0.19* | 0.33 **/0.22 * | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.04/0.03 | 0.29 */0.23 | 0.33 **/0.16 | 0.33 **/0.16 | ||
SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS | S1. Age (Positive correlation indicates younger people are more likely to have carried out self-protective measures.) | All cities | −0.07/0.01 | −0.07/0.01 | 0.02/0.00 | 0.01/0.00 |
Baguio | −0.04/0.00 | −0.10/0.01 | 0.02/0.00 | 0.00/0.00 | ||
Dagupan | −0.20 */0.06 | 0.02/0.00 | 0.09/0.02 | 0.11/0.03 | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.05/0.01 | −0.20 */0.08 | −0.16/0.03 | −0.12/0.01 | ||
S2. Gender (Positive correlation indicates men are more likely to have carried out self-protective measures.) | All cities | 0.05/0.00 | −0.05/0.01 | −0.15 */0.03 * | −0.07/0.01 | |
Baguio | 0.14/0.03 | 0.04/0.00 | −0.21*/0.06 | −0.04/0.00 | ||
Dagupan | −0.14/0.03 | −0.23 */0.15 | −0.34 **/0.15 * | −0.31 **/0.13 * | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.09/0.01 | −0.07/0.01 | 0.09/0.01 | 0.07/0.01 | ||
S3. Educational level | All cities | 0.16 */0.04 * | 0.10/0.03 | 0.13 */0.03 | 0.14 */0.04 * | |
Baguio | 0.20 */0.06 | 0.09/0.02 | 0.10/0.01 | 0.06/0.00 | ||
Dagupan | 0.16/0.08 | 0.17/0.10 | 0.32 */0.18 * | 0.37 **/0.24 ** | ||
Tuguegarao | −0.03/0.01 | 0.22 */0.07 | 0.17/0.04 | 0.14/0.03 | ||
S4. Household status (Source for cooking) | All cities | 0.17 */0.05 * | 0.13 */0.03 | 0.13 */0.03 | 0.16 */0.04 * | |
Baguio | 0.14/0.03 | 0.09/0.01 | 0.02/0.00 | 0.02/0.00 | ||
Dagupan | 0.22/0.11 | 0.15/0.07 | 0.24 */0.07 | 0.28 */0.10 * | ||
Tuguegarao | 0.06/0.01 | 0.24 */0.09 | 0.26 **/0.10 | 0.23 */0.08 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Werg, J.L.; Grothmann, T.; Spies, M.; Mieg, H.A. Factors for Self-Protective Behavior against Extreme Weather Events in the Philippines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6010. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156010
Werg JL, Grothmann T, Spies M, Mieg HA. Factors for Self-Protective Behavior against Extreme Weather Events in the Philippines. Sustainability. 2020; 12(15):6010. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156010
Chicago/Turabian StyleWerg, Jana Lorena, Torsten Grothmann, Michael Spies, and Harald A. Mieg. 2020. "Factors for Self-Protective Behavior against Extreme Weather Events in the Philippines" Sustainability 12, no. 15: 6010. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156010
APA StyleWerg, J. L., Grothmann, T., Spies, M., & Mieg, H. A. (2020). Factors for Self-Protective Behavior against Extreme Weather Events in the Philippines. Sustainability, 12(15), 6010. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156010