1. Tsunami Risk Across Six Communities 33 rd Annual Hazard Research and Applications Workshops July 14, 2008 NSF Grant # HSD 0527387

2. Tsunami Risk Across Six Communities Bruce Houghton Penny Larin Liesel Ritchie Stephen Meinhold Douglas Paton Duane Gill Chris Gregg David Johnson Jennifer Horan NSF Grant # HSD 0527387

3. Workshop format Introduction Awareness & Knowledge Preparedness Social Capital Warnings & Evacuations Wrap up Discussion Bruce Houghton Duane Gill Stephen Meinhold & Jennifer Horan Liesel Ritchie Chris Gregg Bruce Houghton

4. Ocean Shores, WA Seaside, OR Coronado, CA New Hanover, NC Kauai, HI Kodiak, AK

5. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Design and Implementation Phase 1: September 2006 – June 2007 114 closed-end 13 open-ended Telephone interviews Phase 2: October 2007 – January 2008 49 repeat closed-ended 31 new closed-ended

6. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Sample size and returns CommunityP 1 sentP1 returnsP2 returns Oregon1775521213 Washington1500582275 California2000666327 Hawaii100014866 Alaska1500437167 N. Carolina1200448196 Total747528021244

7. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 TOPICS Attitudes and beliefs about tsunamis Tsunami awareness Warning signs of tsunamis Preparing for tsunamis Tsunami preparedness in the community Community values General approaches to decision-making

8. 1964 No event 1957 1964 Past damaging tsunamis

9. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Tsunami Awareness Communities that have experienced a major tsunami event with the past 50 years …. – Have greater awareness of the danger, threat, and damaging impacts of a future tsunami – Perceive a greater likelihood of another one occurring in the near and distant future

10. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Tsunami Processes The vast majority of respondents know that earthquakes are the most common cause of tsunamis About 6 out of 10 respondents understand that tsunamis can occur as multiple big and small waves About 3 out of 10 respondents do not know the time between waves

11. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Selected tsunami preparedness attitudes Difficult to Prepare P2 Change Home Damage P2 Change Life Disruption P2 Change N. Carolina 36-72646-11 Washington 29-616052-11 Hawaii 16-533+569+2 Alaska 11-327+181+2 California 38-222+160-5 Oregon 2220+276+5

12. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Selected tsunami preparedness behavior Seek Information P2 Change Discussed Preparedness P2 Change Family Emergency Plan California9-1346+1527 N. Carolina8-1026+727 Alaska13-682+636 Hawaii19-362+157 Washington16-375-460 Oregon27+880+259

13. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Social Capital Social capital refers to “social networks, the reciprocities that arise from them, and the value of these for achieving mutual goals” The more social capital in a community – exhibited as trust, fellowship, associations, connections, networks, social intercourse, good will, sympathy, and norms of reciprocity – the “healthier” the community

14. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Social Capital Networks of social capital facilitate a flow of information providing a basis for action and assisting in individual and community goal attainment (Coleman 1988; Putnam 2000) Lack of social capital impedes flow of information in communities and, ultimately, hinders a community’s capacity to resist threats or collectively take advantage of opportunities (Putnam 2000)

15. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Social Capital – Quality of Life Quality of life – one aspect of social capital – was generally seen as high in our sample communities Almost 9 out of 10 respondents believe their community is a great place to live About 8 out of 10 believe their community is a safe place to live

16. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Social Capital – Trust We asked about trust in various groups, including local government, community leaders, local law enforcement Highest levels of trust were in law enforcement to protect and maintain order in the community (50-60%) Lowest levels of trust were in local government (25-30%)

17. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Social Capital – Community Attachment Items included contributing to local causes, attending public meetings, volunteerism, participation in local activities, working with others to improve the community About 9 out of 10 respondents reported having contributed to local causes About 6 out of 10 indicated they have engaged in the other forms of community activities

18. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Why warnings? Warning Response Model (Mileti and colleagues) Protective Action Decision Model (Lindell and colleagues) Official Informal Natural / Environmental Cues

19. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Phase I. How likely an alert? Local tsunami Distant tsunami N=2,519 Likely Maybe Unlikely 321321

20. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 1 = strongly disagree to 5 =strongly agree N= 1,086 Phase 2. Perceived ability to recognize & distinguish environmental cues Distinguish earthquakes from man-made shaking3.81.2 Earthquakes shaking last longer than man-made3.41.3 Earthquakes shaking stronger than man-made3.91.2 Location of shore at low tide4.50.8 Familiar with seafloor at low tide3.51.2 Shoreline recedes faster during tsunami4.30.9 Shoreline will always recede before tsunami3.51.2 Tsunami wave shapes could be complex4.30.9 Tsunami waves can vary over short distances3.90.9 Tsunami waves will always look different2.91.2

21. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Conclusions: community extremes North Carolina Poor knowledge of existence of hazard & risk High trust in leadership No tsunami warning system in place Little knowledge of how to prepare or existence of plans C

22. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Washington High hazard awareness Tsunami warning system in place Acceptance of tangible risk Knowledge of warning system and evacuation plan BUT Low trust in: – Adequacy of routes – Role of media and leaders W Conclusions: community extremes

23. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 A Alaska High hazard awareness Tsunami warning system in place Acceptance of tangible risk Knowledge of warning system & evacuation plan High self efficacy Conclusions: community extremes

24. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Conclusions: implications for warnings No unique formula is applicable to all communities Awareness & knowledge are NOT sufficient to create preparedness. e.g. Washington Communities are in different stages of knowledge and awareness and have different needs Warning system should incorporate informal warnings & environmental cues

25. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Challenges Instrument design (community diversity) Geographic spread of researchers Cross-disciplinary differences in culture

26. NSF Grant # HSD 0527387 Quo vadis Psychometric model