Motivating Action under Uncertain Conditions: Enhancing Emergency Briefings during Coastal Storms

Rachel Hogan Carr Nurture Nature Center, Easton, Pennsylvania

Search for other papers by Rachel Hogan Carr in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Burrell Montz Department of Geography, Planning, and Environment, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina

Search for other papers by Burrell Montz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Kathryn Semmens Nurture Nature Center, Easton, Pennsylvania

Search for other papers by Kathryn Semmens in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Keri Maxfield Nurture Nature Center, Easton, Pennsylvania

Search for other papers by Keri Maxfield in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Stephanie Hoekstra Department of Geography, Planning, and Environment, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina

Search for other papers by Stephanie Hoekstra in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Elizabeth Goldman RMC Research Corporation, Portsmouth, New Hampshire

Search for other papers by Elizabeth Goldman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Coastal flood risk communication is most effective at motivating action when the medium and timing of delivery provide understandable information with clear directives when residents need it most. The U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) has many useful coastal flood forecast tools and products, but how and when this information is delivered are of critical importance. To assess how coastal residents understand and interpret NWS coastal flood products and the best mechanisms for delivery, five focus groups (including residents and emergency managers) in Monmouth and Ocean Counties in New Jersey were conducted. These focus groups employed a scenario-based approach that walked participants through the seven days leading up to Hurricane Sandy. Results support the use of emergency briefing packages as a preferred method for disseminating storm and flood risk information. However, changes to improve visual clarity, provide more succinct information, and localize messages must be undertaken for risk communication to be effective. Further, while residents prefer storm information four to five days prior to storm landfall, emergency managers preferred information seven days prior in order to have time to disseminate information to the community. Findings from this study, which include proposed revisions to NWS products, are expected to improve risk communication and community resiliency in the face of coastal storm threats.

Corresponding author address: Rachel Hogan Carr, Nurture Nature Center, 518 Northampton Street, Easton, PA 18042. E-mail: rhogan@nurturenature.org

Abstract

Coastal flood risk communication is most effective at motivating action when the medium and timing of delivery provide understandable information with clear directives when residents need it most. The U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) has many useful coastal flood forecast tools and products, but how and when this information is delivered are of critical importance. To assess how coastal residents understand and interpret NWS coastal flood products and the best mechanisms for delivery, five focus groups (including residents and emergency managers) in Monmouth and Ocean Counties in New Jersey were conducted. These focus groups employed a scenario-based approach that walked participants through the seven days leading up to Hurricane Sandy. Results support the use of emergency briefing packages as a preferred method for disseminating storm and flood risk information. However, changes to improve visual clarity, provide more succinct information, and localize messages must be undertaken for risk communication to be effective. Further, while residents prefer storm information four to five days prior to storm landfall, emergency managers preferred information seven days prior in order to have time to disseminate information to the community. Findings from this study, which include proposed revisions to NWS products, are expected to improve risk communication and community resiliency in the face of coastal storm threats.

Corresponding author address: Rachel Hogan Carr, Nurture Nature Center, 518 Northampton Street, Easton, PA 18042. E-mail: rhogan@nurturenature.org
Save
  • Department of Commerce, 2016: FY 2016 annual performance plan/FY 2014 annual performance report. 63 pp. [Available online at http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY16APPRs/DOC%20APPR.pdf.]

  • Dillon, R. L., Tinsley C. H. , and Cronin M. , 2011: Why near-miss events can decrease an individual’s protective responses to hurricanes. Risk Anal., 31, 440–449, doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01506.x.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fjord, L., 2007: Disasters, race, and disability: [Un]seen through the political lens on Katrina. J. Race Policy, 3, 46–66.

  • Laska, S., and Morrow B. H. , 2006: Social vulnerabilities and Hurricane Katrina: An unnatural disaster in New Orleans. Mar. Technol. Soc. J., 40, 16–26, doi:10.4031/002533206787353123.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Meyer, R. J., Baker E. J. , Broad K. , Czajokwski J. , and Orlove B. , 2014: The dynamics of hurricane risk perception: Real-time evidence from the 2012 Atlantic Hurricane season. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 95, 1389–1404, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00218.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mileti, D. S., and Sorenson J. H. , 1990: Communication of emergency public warnings: A social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Rep. ORNL-6609, 145 pp. [Available online at http://www.cires.org.mx/docs_info/CIRES_003.pdf.]

  • Morrow, B. H., Lazo J. K. , Rhome J. , and Feyen J. , 2015: Improving storm surge risk communication: Stakeholder perspectives. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 96, 35–48, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00197.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Parker, D. J., and Handmer J. W. , 1998: The role of unofficial flood warning systems. J. Contingencies Crisis Manage., 6, 45–60, doi:10.1111/1468-5973.00067.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Perry, R. W., Lindell M. K. , and Greene M. R. , 1981: Evacuation Planning in Emergency Management. Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers Series, Lexington Books, 199 pp.

  • QRS International, 2012: NVivo qualitative data analysis software, version 10. QSR International Pty Ltd.

  • Renne, J., Sanchez T. , Jenkins P. , and Peterson R. , 2009: Challenge of evacuating the carless in five major U.S. cities: Identifying the key issues. Transp. Res. Rec., 2119, 36–44, doi:10.3141/2119-05.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Richards, L., 1999: Using NVivo in Qualitative Research. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, Sage Publications, 240 pp.

  • Sharma, U., and Patt A. , 2012: Disaster warning response: The effects of different types of personal experience. Nat. Hazards, 60, 409–423, doi:10.1007/s11069-011-0023-2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tobin, G. A., and Montz B. E. , 1997: Natural Hazards: Explanation and Integration. Guilford Press, 388 pp.

  • Tufte, E. R., 2001: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. 2nd ed. Graphics Press, 197 pp.

  • Zaalberg, R., Midden C. , Meijnders A. , and McCalley T. , 2009: Prevention, adaptation, and threat denial: Flooding experiences in the Netherlands. Risk Anal., 29, 1759–1778, doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01316.x.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 815 503 73
PDF Downloads 201 50 6