房屋所有权、种族和社会关系如何影响防洪措施:来自美国两个小城市的证据

IF 2.4 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Sociology Pub Date : 2023-02-18 DOI:10.1080/23251042.2023.2173487
John Aloysius Zinda, Ziyu Zhao, James Zhang, Sarah M. Alexander, David Kay, L. Williams, Lyndsey Cooper, Libby Zemaitis
{"title":"房屋所有权、种族和社会关系如何影响防洪措施:来自美国两个小城市的证据","authors":"John Aloysius Zinda, Ziyu Zhao, James Zhang, Sarah M. Alexander, David Kay, L. Williams, Lyndsey Cooper, Libby Zemaitis","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2023.2173487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Climate change and changing built environments are changing flooding regimes. Since flood management policies often rely on household preparedness, understanding what factors shape household flood preparedness measures is imperative. We focus on three dimensions: race, participation in local organizations, and homeownership as moderated by flood experience. With survey data from two small riverside cities in the northeastern United States, we examine how these factors affect the adoption of low-cost and high-cost flood protection measures. We find that effects of flood experience vary across renters, mortgage-holding homeowners, and homeowners without mortgages, and patterns differ for low-cost and high-cost measures. In regression models that control for other factors, white residents take more low-cost measures than nonwhite residents. Among households in locations with greater flood risk, nonwhite households take more high-cost flood protection measures. Community group participation has a positive effect on low-cost protective measures, and the effect is more pronounced among floodplain residents. Processes related to both race and homeownership shape people’s access to flood preparedness measures. Understanding patterns of household flood protection may help in identifying leverage points for ameliorating disparities in flood vulnerability across communities.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Homeownership, Race, and Social Connections Influence Flood Preparedness Measures: Evidence from 2 Small U.S. Cities\",\"authors\":\"John Aloysius Zinda, Ziyu Zhao, James Zhang, Sarah M. Alexander, David Kay, L. Williams, Lyndsey Cooper, Libby Zemaitis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23251042.2023.2173487\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Climate change and changing built environments are changing flooding regimes. Since flood management policies often rely on household preparedness, understanding what factors shape household flood preparedness measures is imperative. We focus on three dimensions: race, participation in local organizations, and homeownership as moderated by flood experience. With survey data from two small riverside cities in the northeastern United States, we examine how these factors affect the adoption of low-cost and high-cost flood protection measures. We find that effects of flood experience vary across renters, mortgage-holding homeowners, and homeowners without mortgages, and patterns differ for low-cost and high-cost measures. In regression models that control for other factors, white residents take more low-cost measures than nonwhite residents. Among households in locations with greater flood risk, nonwhite households take more high-cost flood protection measures. Community group participation has a positive effect on low-cost protective measures, and the effect is more pronounced among floodplain residents. Processes related to both race and homeownership shape people’s access to flood preparedness measures. Understanding patterns of household flood protection may help in identifying leverage points for ameliorating disparities in flood vulnerability across communities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Sociology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2023.2173487\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2023.2173487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要气候变化和不断变化的建筑环境正在改变洪水状况。由于洪水管理政策通常依赖于家庭备灾,因此了解是什么因素决定了家庭备灾措施至关重要。我们关注三个维度:种族、参与当地组织以及受洪水影响的住房所有权。利用美国东北部两个河畔小城市的调查数据,我们研究了这些因素如何影响低成本和高成本防洪措施的采用。我们发现,洪水经历的影响因租房者、持有抵押贷款的房主和没有抵押贷款的业主而异,低成本和高成本措施的模式也不同。在控制其他因素的回归模型中,白人居民比非白人居民采取了更多低成本的措施。在洪水风险较大的地区的家庭中,非白人家庭采取的防洪措施成本更高。社区团体参与对低成本保护措施有积极影响,这种影响在洪泛区居民中更为明显。与种族和住房所有权相关的过程决定了人们获得防洪措施的途径。了解家庭防洪模式可能有助于确定缓解社区洪水脆弱性差异的杠杆点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How Homeownership, Race, and Social Connections Influence Flood Preparedness Measures: Evidence from 2 Small U.S. Cities
ABSTRACT Climate change and changing built environments are changing flooding regimes. Since flood management policies often rely on household preparedness, understanding what factors shape household flood preparedness measures is imperative. We focus on three dimensions: race, participation in local organizations, and homeownership as moderated by flood experience. With survey data from two small riverside cities in the northeastern United States, we examine how these factors affect the adoption of low-cost and high-cost flood protection measures. We find that effects of flood experience vary across renters, mortgage-holding homeowners, and homeowners without mortgages, and patterns differ for low-cost and high-cost measures. In regression models that control for other factors, white residents take more low-cost measures than nonwhite residents. Among households in locations with greater flood risk, nonwhite households take more high-cost flood protection measures. Community group participation has a positive effect on low-cost protective measures, and the effect is more pronounced among floodplain residents. Processes related to both race and homeownership shape people’s access to flood preparedness measures. Understanding patterns of household flood protection may help in identifying leverage points for ameliorating disparities in flood vulnerability across communities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Sociology
Environmental Sociology ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Environmental Sociology is dedicated to applying and advancing the sociological imagination in relation to a wide variety of environmental challenges, controversies and issues, at every level from the global to local, from ‘world culture’ to diverse local perspectives. As an international, peer-reviewed scholarly journal, Environmental Sociology aims to stretch the conceptual and theoretical boundaries of both environmental and mainstream sociology, to highlight the relevance of sociological research for environmental policy and management, to disseminate the results of sociological research, and to engage in productive dialogue and debate with other disciplines in the social, natural and ecological sciences. Contributions may utilize a variety of theoretical orientations including, but not restricted to: critical theory, cultural sociology, ecofeminism, ecological modernization, environmental justice, organizational sociology, political ecology, political economy, post-colonial studies, risk theory, social psychology, science and technology studies, globalization, world-systems analysis, and so on. Cross- and transdisciplinary contributions are welcome where they demonstrate a novel attempt to understand social-ecological relationships in a manner that engages with the core concerns of sociology in social relationships, institutions, practices and processes. All methodological approaches in the environmental social sciences – qualitative, quantitative, integrative, spatial, policy analysis, etc. – are welcomed. Environmental Sociology welcomes high-quality submissions from scholars around the world.
期刊最新文献
Place-based understanding of Chilika fishery: power, affect, and materiality When water policies derail livelihood aspirations: farmers’ agency in everyday politics in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta Driving environmental inequality: the unequal harms and benefits of highways Acting on climate change concerns: lay perceptions of possibility, complexity and constraint Is an urban waste-to-energy plant a “green” megaproject? The power of narratives in shaping the city: a Danish case study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1