Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas

https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2021.p0571 Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas – A Case Study of Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand

Paper: Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas – A Case Study of Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand

Indrajit Pal∗,† and Jessada Karnjana∗∗

∗Disaster Preparedness, Mitigation and Management (DPMM), Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) Moo 9, Km 42 Paholyothin Highway, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand †Corresponding author, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] ∗∗National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC), National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Pathum Thani, Thailand [Received November 25, 2020; accepted March 26, 2021]

This study’s purpose is to analyze the degree of risk hoods in this area mostly come from agricultural activi- and vulnerability involved in landslide and flash flood ties, such as rice fields and orchards. Thus, most people prone community areas in Thepparat sub-district, try to change the land use pattern without visualizing the Sichon district, Nakhon Si Thammarat province, consequences. For example, they change the forest area Thailand. It also aims to analyze and understand to a plantation area and cut the slope of the mountain, the socio-economic impacts on the community at the which could cause flash floods and landslides. The exten- household level, and assess the community’s risk and sive floods in 2011 also affected the district and caused vulnerability by examining its risk perception. The massive landslides. Apart from private properties, lots of risk perception was done using focus group discus- government facilities, such as roads, bridges, small dams, sions and a questionnaire survey with key stakehold- and drainage systems were destroyed, and the total dam- ers. It mainly focused on how the risk of landslides ages of all districts amounted to around 320 million baht. and flash floods influences the community’s risk per- As defined by researchers [1, 2], risk perception refers ceptions, which was tested in two parts: at the orga- to people’s subjective judgment of an event’s risk prob- nizational and community levels by focusing on gov- ability based on their different perspectives, experiences, ernment officials and households, respectively. A cor- and knowledge. Therefore, risk perceptions of landslides relation matrix was used to understand the relation- and flash floods differ from person to person based on ship of the indicators selected. The Pearson correla- their individual experiences and knowledge. Society, cul- tion result has shown that the degree of risk aware- ture, and beliefs can also play contributing roles [3]. This ness positively correlates with the income level, educa- subjective judgment of landslide and flash flood risks tion level, and controllability, signifying that the risk would determine the extent to which people are involved of landslides and flash floods influences household risk with national policies and laws. Preparedness and miti- perceptions. The qualitative assessment recommends gation research studies enhance landslide and flash flood community-level preparedness as being paramount to awareness, preparedness plans and programs, as well reduce the risk for a resilient community. as coping activities and resilience skills of the community [4]. Furthermore, the current state of attitudes and perceptions of the stakeholders, authorities, and imple- Keywords: community preparedness, flash flood, land- menters can play a crucial role in influencing the final slide, multi-hazard, risk perception amount of intended involvement, effort, and resources that would be applied at the local level [5]. Therefore, a new trend of study concerns the change 1. Introduction of vulnerability conditions that can bring about disaster risk reduction (DRR), such as the potential of post- Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province is lo- disaster loss [6, 7]. The disaster risk management ap- cated in the southwest of Thailand, and is surrounded by a proach can address each of the components of risk, such high altitude mountain on the west and a plain area on the as hazard intensity and probability, as well as popula- east. Moreover, the mountain’s bedrock comprises gran- tion, critical infrastructure, and vulnerability [8, 9]. More- ite that has a high potential of sliding. Furthermore, the over, since the assessment and perception of risks dif- Sichon district is also prone to flash floods due to heavy fers amongst people in each community, these differences or even moderate rainfall situations. The primary liveli- can be integrated to find out the best information on de-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 571

© Fuji Technology Press Ltd. Creative Commons CC BY-ND: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/). Pal, I. and Karnjana, J.

cision making, which can then be provided to decision- makers for implementing plans, funding, and disaster risk management projects [10]. There is a need to establish some contextual linkages between the multi-hazard risk perceptions of the decision-makers and the community, since these could grossly influence the DRR decision making process for the district and general province. The present study analyzed the involvement of the stakeholders in DRR decision-making. Its outcome could lead to the identification of disaster risk management is- sues/conditions, that need to be addressed based on the risk perceptions of the local people, multi-stakeholders, multi sectors, and departments [11]. Its results could also provide decision-makers in the community with very im- portant recommendations for planning projects and prac- (a) tices more efficiently [12].

2. Background of the Study Area

Nakhon Si Thammarat – the second largest province in the southern part of Thailand – has a varied topography with three distinct features: a mountain range in the middle, a plain area on the eastern coast, and a plain area in the west. The study area is “Thepparat” (Tambon/sub-district) located at 8◦86N and 99◦77E to the north of Nakhon Si Thammarat province, covering an area of around 81.198 km2 (Fig. 1). Its geographical condition is high mountains, about 1,340 m above sea level, flat foot, and plain areas. It has many hills, such as Sam Thep, Teng, (b) and Youn Thao, which create this area’s main canals, Fig. 1. (a) Nakhon Si Thammarat province, Thailand, namely Tha Thon, Sam Thep, Phean, and Pean canals. (b) Thepparat administration. Based on its geographical conditions, the Thepparat Tam- bon community is prone to landslide and flash flood hazards [13]. Tha Thon canal. In particular, heavy losses and damages were faced by village number 10 of Thepparat sub- 3. Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risks of Nakhon district, where 4 people died, 48 houses were completely Si Thammarat damaged, 68 moderately damaged, and government infrastructure for public services, such as roads, bridges, Nakhon Si Thammarat province – located on the east small dams, and drainage system were also destroyed (Ta- coast of the Gulf of Thailand – has a tropical monsoon ble 1). The cost of total damages in all districts were esti- climate, with an annual rainfall of 1,800–2,200 mm. The mated at around 320 million Thai baht. rainy season starts around the middle of May and lasts until mid-January [14]. Landslide and flash flood hazards in Nakhon Si Thammarat are closely associated with the 4. Data Collection Methodology monsoon and typhoons, wherein heavy rainfall can cause slope failures. Heavy rains, combined with poor building The tools and techniques used for collecting the data practices and deforestation, result in landslides and flash and information in this study were designed to measure floods (Table 1) [3]. Communities affected by disasters and evaluate the local community’s risk perceptions. The generally do not receive any warning, and the rural and primary data were gathered through a structured question- economically poor communities are likely to be most af- naire administered to the community, face-to-face inter- fected. views, field observations, and focus group discussions. Sichon district administration reported flash floods and Secondary data such as the map and history, background rainfall-induced landslides during March 23–31, 2011, information of the study area, agricultural land, plans and that were triggered by heavy rainfall (more than 100 mm policies from the Department of Disaster Prevention and per day) for several days. The event was severe, and Mitigation (DDPM)’s provincial office and Department of harmed communities in mountainous areas and along the Mineral Resources were collected from an extensive liter-

572 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas – A Case Study of Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand

Table 1. Historical landslides and ﬂash ﬂoods in Nakhon Si Thammarat province [15].

Date Hazard Location Losses and Damages October 25–26, Tropical Storm Landfall at Laem Talumphuk, 900 people died and more than 10,000 1962 Harriet caused Pak Phanang District, Nakhon Si were homeless. astormsurge Thammarat November 22, 1988 Landslides and Ban Kathun Nuea, Phipun District and 230 people died, and damages worth debris flow Ban Khiri Wong, Lan Saka District, 1 billion Thai baht. Nakhon Si Thammarat November 29, 1993 A tropical Nakhon Si Thammarat 23 people died and damages worth depression can 1.3 billion Thai baht. cause flooding November 3, 1997 Tropical Storm Nakhon Si Thammarat 164 people died. Linda October–December Flooding Many provinces in Southern Thailand 80 people died. Damages up to 54 bil- 2010 lion Thai baht. March 23–April 5, Landslide and Thepparat, Cha Long, and Khao Noi 5 people died from water washout. 2011 flash flood sub-district 124 houses were destroyed and 3,000 had some damages. Estimated bud- get for recovery was 320 million Thai baht. July 2011– Flooding 65 provinces 815 people died and estimated eco- January 2012 nomic losses were 1,425 billion baht.

ature review, and could provide significant outcomes for government organizations and the local community were this study’s data analysis. selected as the main targets for information and data collection (Table 2). 4.1. Field Survey or Field Observation To understand the study area’s actual situation and 5. Multi-Hazard Risk Perception come up with a deeper background and detailed information, this study’s questionnaire survey was designed 5.1. Community Risk Perceptions on Landslides to gather information, such as socio-economic charac- and Flash Floods teristics related to risk perception, and the vulnerability components of the local community. It used a stratified and random sampling process and focus group interviews Risk perceptions were examined using a close-ended to collect field-based data. The sample’s stratification questionnaire survey for the whole community at the will be done based on the decision-making of the various household level, as well as for key stakeholders. This stakeholders in the community. Since this study focused observation was based on the community’s experiences on landslide and flash flood impact in Theppharat Tam- and perceptions of the landslide and flash flood disaster bon, in 15 of its villages, every household was considered in March 2011. The questionnaire includes three parts of as a sample, with a total of 220 respondents. It followed risk perception as shown in Table 3. the method advocated by Yamane [16] (Eq. (1)), and se- The risk perception indicators have been designed to lected its confidence level and allowable error as 95% and understand the relationship between the community’s at- 10%, respectively, titudes when perceiving the risk, and how communities N prepare to respond or cope with disasters. Since each of n = , ...... (1) the chosen indicators were linked with other indicators to 1 + N(e)2 perform some activities in the next step, this study also where “n” is the sample size, “N” the population size, and performed the Pearson correlation matrix to express the “e” the acceptable sampling error. relationship between the indicators. The final findings and results will provide Thepparat with recommendations and suggestions for reducing their risk of landslides and flash 4.2. Selection of Key Informants floods at the community level. This study’s risk percep- For the detailed interviews, key informants were se- tion indicators have been selected to analyze three aspects lected from the community, district, and provincial lev- of risk. First, emergency response, which involves under- els, and included those who were close to the community standing the people’s satisfaction with the response team’s and working with government agencies, so that they could operations in their community (Table 3). Second, aware- provide and share their plans and enhance the community ness of future events, which refers to people’s perceptions, by finding solutions for risk reduction measures. Thus, beliefs, or knowledge about the risks of probable future

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 573 Pal, I. and Karnjana, J.

Table 2. Selection of key informants.

Agencies Administrative Key informants Items presented/discussed/observed levels Department of Disaster Both provincial Head of the • Role of DDPM for landslide and flash flood Prevention and Mitigation and district lev- DDPM Office management in Nakhon Si Thammarat Province (DDPM) of Nakhon Si els and staff as well as Sichon branch, incorporated at the lo- Thammarat Province and cal level to take disaster preparedness and miti- Sichon branch gation. measures, under the central government’s guidance • Related document review The Provincial Meteorological Provincial Head of the • Role of MET in providing weather information Station (MET) level provincial to the landslide and flash flood prone areas by dis- MET office seminating the information to the local government and DDPM Provincial Irrigation Office Provincial Head of the • Role of the irrigation office for management of level Provincial landslides and flash floods Irrigation • Mitigation measures have been taken Office • Related document review Theppharat Tambon Adminis- Theppharat Tambon Ad- • Role of the Theppharat Tambon Administrative trative Organization Sub-district ministration Organization for management of landslides/flash (Tambon) Chief and floods management Level Officers, Com- • Field survey of structured mitigation measures munity Leader for landslides and flash floods • Field observation along the river and mountain during events such as landslides and flash floods • Review of related documents

Table 3. Landslide and ﬂash ﬂood risk perceptions of the focus group and community members.

Risk perception Government organizations∗ Community (Head of the Village) indicators Emergency Establish training and drills, such as One People can manage for 3?4 days, until the response Response Tambon, One Search, and Rescue Team team comes to help them, given that, it is very dif- (OTOS) for civil defense protection teams ficult to enter remote areas, especially when debris and volunteers, in terms of access to first blocks the roads or cuts off the bridges. Moreover, aid and basics. the response team also chooses to shift people to evacuation shelters. Risk awareness Awareness of the future occurrence of People are more aware of the hazards of flash of future events landslides and flash floods. floods, but not of landslides because they have never faced it before. Moreover, they know of evacuation shelters in place. Controllability Structural measures such as dikes and People in flash flood prone areas, know how to pro- check-dams, and non-structural measures tect their houses and properties. However, since such as education and Community Based they do not have prior experience of landslides, Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM) they cannot perform mitigation actions. training programs were taken into account. ∗In this study, government organizations refer to primary stakeholders, who play a significant role in decision making, including disaster prevention and mitigation, at both provincial and branch levels, such as the Provincial Irrigation Office, Provincial Meteorological Station, and Tambon Administration Organization (Table 2). events, such as landslides and flashfloods. Last, controlla- household incomes in the province, i.e., average or be- bility that relates to people’s knowing about the structural low average income; iii) education level categories: low, as well as non-structural mitigation measures that need to medium, and high; iv) controllability: undertaken by peo- be taken, or which are in place. ple to protect their houses and properties from hazards, According to the data preparation, indicators were set such as flash floods and landslides; and v) emergency up based on the following criteria: i) the age group of the response, which involves measuring the people’s satis- sample population; ii) annual household income based on faction and whether they think that the government’s re-

574 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas – A Case Study of Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand

Table 4. Descriptive statistics of selected indicators.

Indicators Classes Frequency Percentage (n = 220) Age group of the <21 59 27 population 21–60 128 58 >60 33 15 Annual household Below average provincial income 161 73 income Above average provincial income 59 27 Education levels Low 147 67 Medium 42 19 High 31 14 Controllability Controlled 147 67 Uncontrolled 73 33 Emergency response Quick 136 62 Delayed 84 48

sponse operations in their community were quick or de- initiate activities, such as improving their houses, etc., layed (Table 4). to reduce their risk. People in the landslide as well as flash flood prone areas were more aware of the risks of flash floods because of having several experiences of flash 5.2. Survey of Key Informants: Officials of Govern- floods, whereas they had faced landslides for the first time ment Organizations in 2011. This qualitative assessment suggests that gaps in The informants for semi-structured interviews were se- risk communication and risk information hold the key for lected from government departments, such as Provincial people living in areas with higher risks. Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, Provincial Irrigation Office, Provincial Meteorological Station, and Disaster 5.4. Household Risk Perceptions Prevention and Mitigation of Sichon district’s Tambon Landslide and flash flood risks can influence personal Administration Organization. The analysis shows that attitudes. The indicators of risk perception at the house- most of the key informants in government organizations hold level, shown in Table 3, were selected from avail- are well aware of landslide and flash flood hazards, in able literature on natural hazards, such as studies by Ho terms of their locations, frequency of events, etc. Most et al. [17] and Ainuddin et al. [18]. These include age, in- of the officials mentioned the various structural mitiga- come, education, controllability, and emergency response. tion measures undertaken at the local level through vari- Risk perceptions can help in understanding the interrela- ous developmental projects and non-structural mitigation tionship of risk perception variables to formulate strate- measures, in line with the national DRR initiatives. gies for addressing risk awareness and preparedness.

5.3. Community Level Risk Perceptions Focus group discussions with representatives have 6. Analysis and Discussion made it possible to analyze their perceptions of landslides and flash floods at the community level. The heads of each 6.1. Correlation Matrix Among Risk Perception In- of the 15 villages were selected as representatives for the dicators interview, which was conducted to understand the percep- Pearson correlation for selected variables, e.g., risk tions in different villages. The community was divided awareness, income levels, education levels, emergency re- into three categories based on the Thepparat community’s sponse, controllability, and age of the people, were con- topography. People in the landslide group were not aware sidered as continuous variables to compare the responses of landslide risks because this kind of a hazard had never of people in both the landslide and flash flood prone ar- occurred in their area before. Hence, they had a lack of eas. Some categorical data like income levels, that were knowledge on how they could control the risk. taken as average provincial income were considered as Moreover, most people in the landslide group resided continuous variables for the correlation study. Similarly, close to foothills, which increased their vulnerability. emergency response and controllability that considered People in the flash flood group were aware of the risk the predominant or higher ranks as representative classes of floods since almost every year, during the monsoon were considered as continuous variables for correlation season, communities located along the Tha Thon canal analysis. The correlation results indicate that the indi- face flash floods, which though of very short duration cators had a relationship (positive or negative) with the (around 1–2 days), have a very high velocity. Since peo- landslide and flash flood risk perceptions in the study area ple in this group had experienced flash floods, they could (Table 5).

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 575 Pal, I. and Karnjana, J.

Table 5. Correlation matrix.

RA IN EL ER CON AG Risk awareness (RA) PC 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N 220 Income levels (IN) PC 0.273* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.041 N 220 220 Education levels (EL) PC 0.595** 0.162* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.002 0.034 N 220 220 220 Emergency Response (ER) PC 0.101 −0.069 −0.145 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.211 0.735 0.462 N 220 220 220 220 Controllability (CON) PC 0.734** 0.544** 0.218* −0.283 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.003 0.004 0.043 0.144 N 220 220 220 220 220 Age of people (AG) PC −0.079 0.023 0.279* 0.036 −0.113 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.691 0.409 0.04 0.858 0.566 N 220 220 220 220 220 220 PC = Pearson Correlation *Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Income levels: The household income was based 14% of highly educated people were well aware of the risk on the Nakhon Si Thammarat province’s average annual of landslides and flash floods, while 67% of respondents household income, viz., 25,124 Thai baht [19]. However, were not. The result indicates that the educational level the income of the majority of the households (73%, i.e., has a positive correlation with people’s risk awareness on 161) is below a province’s average income (15,000 per landslides and flash floods (r = 0.59, N = 220, p < 0.01). household), which is considered as the reference point, Emergency Response: It establishes training and whereas households having incomes below 15,000 baht drills, such as OTOS for civil defense protection teams are considered as poor. For testing the relationship be- and volunteers, in terms of access to first aid and ba- tween income and household risk perception, income in sics. The negative correlation between emergency re- the province is considered in two categories: below aver- sponse and controllability may have been prominent due age household income and above average household in- to the structural mitigation for landslide and flash flood come. With regard to future occurrence and controllabil- prone communities in the study area. Conversely, since ity, income is compared with risk awareness. The results people’s incomes and education levels, both showed a show that the average household income is correlated positive correlation with emergency response, it indicates with the risk awareness of future occurrences (r = 0.27, the influence of human knowledge and financial capacity N = 220, p < 0.05) and controllability (r = 0.54, N = 220, on DRR. p < 0.01) because income is one of the determinants of Controllability: A Pearson correlation that was run a community’s ability to cope with disasters. Regarding to determine the relationship between landslide and flash the community’s housing condition, people had renovated flood risk awareness (future occurrences) and controlla- their houses to avoid future flooding. From the field sur- bility (structural and non-structural measures) showed a vey, it emerged that some people had carried out renova- strong and positive correlation (r = 0.73, N = 220, p < tions, such as lifting the height of their houses by 1.5 m, 0.01). As a result, the correlation matrix shows that the re- etc. many times. Thus, there is a positive correlation be- lationship between risk awareness and controllability has tween income and controllability. a correlation with people in the community having some Education: The respondents’ education was grouped knowledge about the risk, and their having faced it before. into three categories: 1) Low: primary and secondary Especially, since communities in flash flood prone ar- school education; 2) Medium: high school education; and eas had experienced floods, they could take measures 3) High: college and university education. It showed that when hazards did occur. Therefore, local governments in

576 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 Factoring Multi-Hazard Risk Perception in Risk Assessment and Reduction Measures in Landslide and Flash Flood Prone Areas – A Case Study of Sichon District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand

flash flood zones would have taken some measures, such pared to landslides, and the mitigation measures taken by as improving the existing dikes by increasing their height the community based on economic status. However, even and dredging the canal. Moreover, to self-protect their though communities in the flash flood group had more re- communities and reduce direct losses and damages, peo- silience, their disaster risk was still high because coordi- ple have undertaken measures, such as lifting their houses nation between the government departments was absent, and early harvesting of their crop productions. and disaster preparedness and mitigation programs were Age of the people: To examine the relationship undertaken mostly in the landslide group [21]. In gen- between landslide and flash floods risks with people’s eral, respondents were not aware of the hazards and risks age groups, the respondents were categorized into three that the landslides and flash floods could cause [22]. This groups: below 21 years of age, 21–60 years, and above study also found that the local government plays a key 60 years. The frequency analysis showed that 15% were role in increasing disaster awareness. The head of Dis- over 60 years and 27% below 21 years. The elderly or aster Prevention and Mitigation in the Sichon branch and people aged above 60 years, often represent vulnerability the head of the Provincial Meteorological Office, both had to disaster because older people will take a longer time to opportunities to reach out to the community through the recover from injuries from natural hazards. local radio channels (FM radio) for updates on weather situations, and increase public awareness by reporting on disaster news. This study also explored the granularity of 7. Conclusion and Remarks disaster data at various levels, which is also an essential component for improved risk communication and better 7.1. Primary Findings preparedness by the community [23].

Both landslides and flash floods are more frequent due 7.2. Mitigation Strategies for Landslides and Flash to hydro-meteorological phenomena. Generally, people Floods at the Community Level in local communities are the first to face the disaster’s impact. Since disaster management activities may not be Mitigation measures for landslides and flash floods successful with the sole involvement of the national gov- have two parts: short-term and long-term mitigation mea- ernment, the local government and community’s involve- sures. The long-term mitigation measures are mostly re- ment is needed to reduce disaster risks through other ways lated to watershed management and agriculture, forest of implementing a centralized risk governance mecha- cover, and land use patterns. However, short-term miti- nism. The positive correlation between risk awareness gation measures can be initiated by the community and and controllability depicts that people in the community local governments through the following ways: know the risk if they have faced it before. The institu- • Improved and accessible early warning system tional mechanism is playing an essential role in develop- • ing community-based resilience [20]. This study’s pur- Developing coordination for emergency response pose is to analyze the degree of risk and vulnerability, pri- • Identifying safe places for temporary facilities marily qualitative risk perception, in landslide and flash • Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CB- flood prone areas. The risk analysis of the Thepparat DRM) training programs sub-district explores the degree of exposure of the com- • munity at risk, and their vulnerability to both landslides Increasing the capacity of volunteers for search and and flash floods. This study’s risk analysis findings show rescue that three of the villages in one Tambon (Thepparat sub- • Disaster awareness district) had different risks due to their varied topogra- phies, slopes, land-use, and settlement areas. Although the existing landslide susceptibility map can be used to Acknowledgements identify the landslide factors as well as its vulnerability Special thanks to Thailand’s Department of Mineral Resources, areas, the risk of communities vary based on other ele- Nakhon Si Thammarat’s Provincial Disaster Prevention and Miti- ments that progress from vulnerable conditions, such as gation team, Sichon Branch’s Disaster Prevention and Mitigation condition of the roads and houses, as well as capacities, team, Nakhon Si Thammarat’s Meteorological Station, Nakhon Si such as time to receive early warning information, time Thammarat’s Irrigation Office, and Thepparat Tambon’s Admin- istration Organization. We also acknowledge the support received to go to an evacuation shelter, etc. Mostly, the commu- from e-Asia Joint Research Program and National Science and nity’s vulnerability depends on its socio-economic condi- Technology Development Agency under the project entitled “Es- tions, e.g., communities in the landslide group were more tablishment of a Landslide Monitoring and Prediction System.” vulnerable than those in the flash flood group, in which, people had more income, higher levels of education, and more experiences of disasters, which could influence their perceptions and awareness about the risks. Field observations too, support the argument on the higher vulnerability of landslide prone areas than the flash floods ones, due to the higher frequency of flash flood hazards as com-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021 577 Pal, I. and Karnjana, J.

References: [1] S. Paul, “Perceptions of Risk,” Science, Vol.236, No.4799, pp. 280- Name: 285, 1987. Indrajit Pal [2] S. Paul, B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein, “Rating the Risks,” Envi- ronment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, Vol.21, No.3, pp. 14-39. 1979. Affiliation: [3] I. Pal, P. Tularug, S. K. Jana, and D. K. Pal, “Risk assessment and Assistant Professor and Chair, Disaster Pre- reduction measures in landslide and flash flood-prone areas: A case paredness, Mitigation and Management, Asian of southern Thailand (Nakhon si Thammarat province),” P. Samui, Institute of Technology D. Kim, and C. Ghosh (Eds.), “Integrating Disaster Science and Management: Global Case Studies in Mitigation and Recovery,” pp. 295-308, Elsevier, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-812056-9.00017-8, 2018. [4] A. Mohanty, M. Hussain, M. Mishra, D. B. Kattel, and I. Pal, Address: “Exploring community resilience and early warning solution for Moo 9, Km 42 Paholyothin Highway, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, flash floods, debris flow and landslides in conflict prone villages of Badakhshan, Afghanistan,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Reduction, Thailand Vol.33, pp. 5-15, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.07.012, 2019. Brief Career: [5] K. K. Lwin, I. Pal, S. Shrestha, and P. Warnitchai, “Assessing 2002- Senior Project Assistant, Indian Institute of Technology social resilience for flood-vulnerable communities in Ayeyarwady 2006- Associate Professor, Centre for Disaster Management, Lal Bahadur Delta, Myanmar,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol.51, Article Shastri National Academy of Administration No.101745, doi: org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101745, 2020. 2014- Assistant Professor and Chair, Disaster Preparedness, Mitigation [6] A. Dacosta, D. Theresa, and K. Joseph, “Risk Perception and Dis- and Management, Asian Institute of Technology aster Management in the Savannah Region of Ghana,” Int. J. of Hu- Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations: manities and Social Science, Vol.3, No.3, pp. 85-96, 2013. • [7] K. Munjuluri, I. Pal, and N. K. Tripathi, “Geospatial Techniques Regional Integrated Multi-Hazard Early Warning System for Africa and for rapid Post Disaster Needs Assessment (rPDNA),” Int. J. of Asia (RIMES), Advisor DRR and Governance Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE), Vol.8, No.4, doi: • Global Alliance of Disaster Research Institutes (GARDI), Board of 10.35940/ijrte.D8017.118419, 2019. Director’s Member [8] G. Torsten and F. Reusswig, “People at Risk of Flooding: Why • Indian Society of Remote Sensing, Life Member Some Residents Take Precautionary Action While Others Do Not,” Natural Hazards, Vol.38, No.1-2, pp. 101-20, doi: 10.1007/s11069- 005-8604-6, 2006. [9] I. Pal and S. Bhatia, “Disaster risk governance and city resilience in Asia-pacific region,” R. Shaw, K. Shiwaku, and T. Izumi (Eds.), “Science and technology in disaster risk reduction in Asia: Po- Name: tentials and challenges,” pp. 137-159, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12- Jessada Karnjana 812711-7.00009-2, 2017. [10] M. A. Fadlallah, I. Pal, and V. C. Hoe, “Determinants of perceived risk among artisanal gold miners: A case study of Berber locality, Affiliation: Sudan,” The Extractive Industries and Society, Vol.7, No.2, pp. 748- National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC), 757, doi: 10.1016/j.exis.2020.03.006, 2020. National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) [11] M. C. Ho et al., “How Do Disaster Characteristics Influence Address: Risk Perception,” Risk Analysis, Vol.28, No.3, pp. 635-643, doi: 112 Thailand Science Park, Khlong Luang, Pathum Thani 12120, Thailand 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01040.x, 2008. [12] Defra, “Understanding the risk, empowering communities, building resilience. Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation. (n.d.),” Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, 2011, http://www.disaster.go.th/dpm/ (in Thai) [accessed June 12, 2020] [13] Department of Mineral Resource, “Landslide Hazard map in Nakhon Si Thammarat. Environmental Research,” Thailand, 2010. [14] Thailand Integrated Water Resources Management, http://www. thaiwater.net/web/ [accessed July 23, 2020] [15] “EM-DAT (1900-2015),” EM-DAT: The International Disaster Database, http://www.emdat.be/database [accessed June 25, 2020] [16] T. Yamane, “Statistics, An Introductory Analysis,” 2nd edition, Harper and Row, 1967. [17] M.-C. Ho, D. Shaw, S. Lin, and Y.-C. Chiu, “ How Do Disaster Characteristics Influence Risk Perception?,” Risk Analysis, Vol.28, pp. 635-643, doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01040.x, 2008. [18] S. Ainuddin, D. P. Aldrich, J. K. Routray, S. Ainuddin, and A. Achkazai, “The need for local involvement: Decentraliza- tion of disaster management institutions in Baluchistan, Pak- istan,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol.6, pp. 50-58, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2013.04.001, 2013. [19] National Statistical Office, Ministry of Information and Commu- nication Technology, “The Household Socio-Economic Survey,” 2015. [20] I. Pal, T. Ghosh, and C. Ghosh, “Institutional framework and administrative systems for effective disaster risk governance – perspectives of 2013 cyclone Phailin in India,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol.21, pp. 350-359, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.01.002, 2017. [21] C. Ghosh and I. Pal, “Geotechnical measures for Uttarakhand flash flood-2013, India,” Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.48, No.1, pp. 117-127, 2017. [22] M. Kuri, “Recent Perceptions of Volcanic Hazard-Related Infor- mation in Japan: Expectation of Eruption Predictability and Ac- ceptance of Uncertainty (2019),” J. Disaster Res., Vol.14, No.8, pp. 1072-1085, doi: 10.20965/jdr.2019.p1072, 2019. [23] H. Tanaka, D. Sasaki, and Y. Ono, “Proposed Requirement Defi- nition Method for Developing Global Disaster Database Based on Various Means of Data Collection (2018),” J. Disaster Res., Vol.13, No.6, pp. 1015-1023, doi: 10.20965/jdr.2018.p1015, 2018.

578 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.16 No.4, 2021