Volume 33, Issue 6 p. 1049-1065
Original Research Article

The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards

Gisela Wachinger

Gisela Wachinger

Department of Social Sciences V: Environmental Sociology and Technology Assessment, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Ortwin Renn

Corresponding Author

Ortwin Renn

Department of Social Sciences V: Environmental Sociology and Technology Assessment, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany

Address correspondence to Ortwin Renn; ortwin.renn@sowi.uni-stuttgart.de.Search for more papers by this author
Chloe Begg

Chloe Begg

Department Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Christian Kuhlicke

Christian Kuhlicke

Department Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 24 December 2012
Citations: 1,145

Abstract

This article reviews the main insights from selected literature on risk perception, particularly in connection with natural hazards. It includes numerous case studies on perception and social behavior dealing with floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, wild fires, and landslides. The review reveals that personal experience of a natural hazard and trust—or lack of trust—in authorities and experts have the most substantial impact on risk perception. Cultural and individual factors such as media coverage, age, gender, education, income, social status, and others do not play such an important role but act as mediators or amplifiers of the main causal connections between experience, trust, perception, and preparedness to take protective actions. When analyzing the factors of experience and trust on risk perception and on the likeliness of individuals to take preparedness action, the review found that a risk perception paradox exists in that it is assumed that high risk perception will lead to personal preparedness and, in the next step, to risk mitigation behavior. However, this is not necessarily true. In fact, the opposite can occur if individuals with high risk perception still choose not to personally prepare themselves in the face of a natural hazard. Therefore, based on the results of the review, this article offers three explanations suggesting why this paradox might occur. These findings have implications for future risk governance and communication as well as for the willingness of individuals to invest in risk preparedness or risk mitigation actions.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.