Greece is a country which is often affected by catastrophic natural phenomena (especially forest fires, floods and earthquakes).The study aimed to identify the information provided to residents of Northern Evros, concerning natural disasters. Primarily, residents were asked to express their opinion about the importance of recording their views via questionnaire and to evaluate natural disasters depending on their risk degree. Moreover, it was investigated whether the residents were informed for the recovering actions from a natural disaster, if they were aware about the role and the responsibilities of the Civil Protection Service and which sources of information they used. They were also asked about the way the information about the real size of a natural disaster should be formed by the media and the reason why scientists talked to the media after a catastrophic natural disaster. Furthermore, the views of the residents were analyzed regarding operations that would be done temporally, after a catastrophic risk for recovery and from which shared state services in their region, for every kind of natural disaster separately.
Natural disasters are the impact of oversized natural phenomena
When a region is vulnerable to natural disasters, the citizens should be sufficiently
informed about the problem with the correct and adequate information
Information and communication present significant advances in disaster
prevention and crisis management
The study focuses on the perceptions and knowledge of the residents of Northern Evros about natural disasters. In particular the citizens evaluate natural disasters proportionally with their hazard degree, the actions that residents should take in order to face a natural disaster, the role of stakeholders and specifically the role of the Civil Protection. Also, they evaluated the different sources of information about natural hazards and comment on the role of the broadcast media and scientific community. 2
The research was carried out with the application of a face to face structured
questionnaire. The research area of this paper was Northern Evros (967.5km2) the
northernmost regional unit of Greece that includes the city of Orestiada and the 33
around villages with total population 39,485 (under the national census of 2011). It
borders with Turkey to the east, across the river Evros, and it borders with Bulgaria
to the north and the northwest)
Random sampling was applied. The population ratio that is also the impartial evaluation of the real ratio of the population p and the assessment of the standard error of the population ratio of the sp without correction of the finite population as the sampling fraction is small, has been calculated using the formulae of simple random sampling.
To calculate the size of the sample we thought it would be necessary to conduct
pre-sampling with a sample size of 50 individuals. The size of this sample was
calculated based on the formulae of simple random sampling (where t = 1.96 and e =
0.048) (Μatis, 2001). Even though simple random sampling without off reset was
used, the correction of the finite population can be omitted as the sample size n is
small in relation to the population size N
The total of questions which were reported to the possible sources of information
constitutes a multi-theme variable on which reliability analysis is applied. In
particular, in order to find out the internal reliability of a questionnaire
However, the checking must not only be reliable, it must also be credible and this
is done through the application of factor analysis (Sharma, 1996). In particular, we
used the method of principal components which is based on the spectral analysis of
the variance table (correlation). Regarding the significance of the principal
components, the criterion which was used was the one suggested by Guttman and
Kaiser
Primarily, the residents of Northern Evros were asked about how important it is to record their view about natural disasters through the questionnaire. The residents considered that it was important (35.8%), very important (27%) and most important (21%) their surveying through the questionnaire (Fig. 1).
Important, 35.8%, sp=0.0240
Very important, 27.0%, sp=0.0222
Little important, 12.8%, sp=0.0167
Not important,
3.5%, sp=0.0092
Most important, 21.0%, sp=0.0204
During the interviews residents were asked to evaluate natural disasters according to the degree of risk (Table 1). As very significant characterized from the citizens natural disasters as earthquakes (70.8%), tsunami (57.8%), forest fires (56%), the floods (44.8%) and the volcanic eruptions (45.2%). However, people characterize a natural disaster more dangerous, regardless of the probability of occurrence, unless the negative impact that poses, e.g. the possibility of tsunami in the region is too small, but the disaster that will be caused is huge.
Informing people plays an important role as it contributes to minimize the catastrophic effects that a natural disaster can bring about, and it can generally reduce human losses. Table 2 presents the degree of which residents of Northern Evros were informed of the actions they should take in case of natural disasters. It was found that the residents were not very informed about the relevant actions that should be taken in case of natural disasters.
According to figure 2 the knowledge of the role and responsibilities of the Civil Protection Agency is rather mediocre.
Table 3 presents the sources of natural disaster information that residents consider as most important. It was found that the internet and education were the most important; however, the internet had a relatively large percentage of negative answers due to the fact that it was not used by older people.
In the above variables reliability analysis was applied, after the appropriate checks. Reliability co-efficient alfa is 0.750 and this result constitutes strong evidence that the grades of the scale are logically consistent, i.e. our data have the tendency to measure the same thing.
Moreover, before we moved on with the application of factor analysis the necessary checks were done. In Table 4 we can see that the factors that were extracted were three and they all have a characteristic root bigger than 1. Additionally, the second column shows the percentage of variation that is attributed to every factor while the third column shows the percentage of variation that is attributed to every factor after rotation. The bigger the loading of a variable the more this factor is responsible for the total variation of the grades within the variable under consideration. The variables that ‘belong’ to every factor are those for which the loading (columns 1, 2, 3) is bigger (than 0.5) in this factor.
significant 37.5% 0.0242 24.5% 0.0215 23.0% 0.0210 32.5% 0.0234 27.8% 0.0224 12.2% 0.0164 33.5% 0.0236 32.2% 0.0234 10.8% 0.0155 5.5% 0.0114 4.8% 0.0106 11.2% 0.0158 11.2% 0.0158 2.8% 0.0082 14.8% 0.0177 18.2% 0.0193
Very insignificant
Factor 1 includes the variables ‘Television-radio’, ‘Newspapers -magazines’ ‘internet’ and we can name it as ‘typical sources of information’.
important
Mediocre
Factor 2 can be named as ‘alternative sources of information’ and includes the variables ‘books- encyclopaedias’, ‘brochures’ and ‘Voluntary organizations’ could also be included in this factor even if their figure is below 0.5. The second variable with a same figure is also included in Factor 1. Therefore the two variables can be considered to act as bridges between Factor 1 and Factor 2.
Factor 3 includes the variables ‘Family and friends’ and ‘education’ and we can name it as ‘information from the close environment’.
The information provided to the public, after a natural disaster, should be immediate and accurate (Lekkas, 2000). Unless accurate information is provided, citizens will created the sense-perception that authorities are trying to conceal the truth, while in the opposite case, when the information is disseminated and difficult to understand. In this case, misunderstandings arise, that lead to influence of panic prevails.
The majority of the participants (61.0%) stated that the information concerning the size of a natural disaster should be given quickly and in the real size (Figure 3). In fact according to residents the information is given immediately but exaggerated in size (Figure 4).
With delay and partial with delay but in real size
immediately but partial immediately and in real size 4.0%, sp=0.0098 6.5%, sp=0.0123 26.2%, sp=0.0220 no significance for the size and the time 2.2%, sp=0.0074
61.0%, sp=0.0244 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Despite the importance of communication interaction between the media and the
public, it often turns out to be inaccurate. The inhabitants of Northern Evros were
asked to assess the information provided by the media. It is not coincidental, that
they believe in a percentage of 41.8% that the information is given quickly and with
exaggeration regarding the size and each reporter is trying to have the exclusivity of
the news of a natural disaster. It should be mentioned that in extreme conditions after
a catastrophic natural disaster is difficult to collect information, but this does not
justify the dramatization of the news. A way out in informing citizens is the
specialists’ involvement in the media. The scientist who deals with the mitigation
and prediction of disasters is an excellent source of information which can be
exploited from the journalists (Lekkas, 2000). Scientific community may tend to
believe that individuals and organizations underestimate the risks to which they are
exposed. On the other hand, many of these individuals and organizations believe that
the scientific community overestimates the risks. Scientists are often questioned
about their theories, as if scientific facts were no more than one group’s beliefs
Finally, the inhabitants of Northern Evros were asked to assess the participation of scientists in the media after a natural disaster (Table 5). Generally, the residents believe that the scientists talk to the media after a natural disaster because they usually want to promote themselves as scientists (44.5%), while they believe that they often do so in order to inform the people (48%), to calm and support them (45.2%), to inform them what they were not able to support it earlier (37%) and in order to put the State under pressure for economic support during their research (43.5%).
The current work describes how the public is informed and responds to warnings about natural disasters. According to the results of the research, residents consider natural disasters as very significant, depending on their degree of risk, the earthquakes, tsunamis, forest fires, floods and volcanic eruptions. Moreover, they are better informed for the natural disasters that affect their region more often, such as earthquakes and forest fires, snow and frost, while they are less informed on the role and the responsibilities of the Civil Protection. Concerning the sources from which they derive information on natural disasters, citizens consider the internet as the most important source of information today.
For the briefing on the size of a natural disaster, the majority of residents of Northern Evros considered that it should be done immediately and with accuracy regarding the size of the disaster. Unfortunately, the citizens affirmed that, although public information on the natural disaster size was fast, it was exaggerated, thereby causing confusion, stress and fear to the community. Even though scientists were the most reliable source of information, the citizens believe that their appearance is not only to calm, inform and support people but also to pressure the state for economic support of their relevant research programs on natural hazards.
Acknowledgments. This research has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program "Education and Lifelong Learning" of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) - Research Funding Program: Thales. Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund.